| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
JAME5 KIRK
   |
Posted - 2009.05.13 06:41:00 -
[1]
After briefly perusing several genre specific encyclopedia's and then using eve's new view item tool, one thing stands out to me.
EVE's ships are huge compared to other genre's and have relatively little weaponry (i know this makes for easier gameplay).
The orca for example is the size of a star destroyer (victory class original movie), yet these ship are relatively easy to build.
Even a shuttle is 40m long thats the size of 3 articulated lorries (nearly).
Does anyone think a rescaling of ships may be in order to make small ships small and the bigger ships bigger etc.
input appreciated.
|
Leiara Knight
Gallente
The Oblivion Guard
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 06:52:00 -
[2]
Hi James. I'm glad we can have this discussion.
|
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 07:15:00 -
[3]
You should have been here when stations didn't look big enough to handle one battleship, much less hundreds.
 Originally by: CCP Oveur
The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
Warscythe Prime
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 07:32:00 -
[4]
Light drones are also 30m long 
|
SuperNova221
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 07:39:00 -
[5]
It's secretly a pre-nerf to walking in stations for after they allow you to walk onto your ship to dock, it's to **** you off by taking to long to walk around it!
|
Shereza
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 07:41:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Warscythe Prime
Light drones are also 30m long
They sure do pack up good then, seeing as they only take up five cubic meters in the drone bay.
____________________
Minmatar in Fantasy or Duct Tape Goes Medieval. |
Leiara Knight
Gallente
The Oblivion Guard
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 07:45:00 -
[7]
Quite an interesting story behind it, actually. Back in the early days of Eve (mid-1980s) the star vessels were largely smaller and somewhat simpler of design. Indeed, it was a simpler time in general.
However, capsuleers wanted more: more systems, more power, more weaponry, and so on. Many were quite vocal in their complaints - with the notable exception of myself, whom greatly fears and respects the developers - and soon enough their wishes and cries were realised. With these new gifts, however, came a bitter and startling cost: size.
|
Emma Peil
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 07:55:00 -
[8]
I'm not sure...I think The Culture likely has bigger ships than Eve. It is a post-scarcity society so resources is not an issue.
As for Eve I like my 'S P A C E - O P E R A' really big. And epic.
|
Mira O'karr
Minmatar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 08:29:00 -
[9]
why is it a problem?
|
TimMc
Gallente
Brutal Deliverance
Blackguard Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 08:34:00 -
[10]
Why so big? Because its awesome. Look at this image of all the eve ships for scale.
|
|
|
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 08:58:00 -
[11]
It is difficult to get a true sense of scale in the game though mainly because the camera zoom is relative to whatever you're flying.
You can zoom all the way on a shuttle for example, then "Look At" a battleship and the camera will either end up inside it or will readjust to the "max zoomed in level when flying a battleship".
I realise technically the effort involved in texturing a battleship if you could zoom in with the same granularity as zooming in on a shuttle, but even so it does take you out of the game somewhat when you "look at" different ships when in space.
|
Nico Terces
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 09:30:00 -
[12]
What I dont understand is how projectile size scales to range... I mean a proper artillery cannon can fire say what, 40 km distance on earth, which is in a parabolic trajectory.
Now, our eve guns fire like 50 km without advanced skills and technology... That's not very far in space, where there's almost no gravity or friction.
Basically I would like to see the distances increased by a factor 10 on everything, range, falloff, speed, whatever. Just to make the scales a bit more decent. It also makes me at least think that space-enterprising humanity did find some technological improvements on weaponry.
|
Sylar McIntyr
Caldari
Konstrukteure der Zukunft
AAA Citizens
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 09:40:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Nico Terces
...
Now, our eve guns fire like 50 km without advanced skills and technology... That's not very far in space, where there's almost no gravity or friction.
...
Well, gravity is not restricted to planets and ist not like duct tape and sracp metal make good sniper weapons 
Anyway i would appreciate mor guns (visually only, NO ingame effect) for mor lights and so 
________________________________________________
Making space dangerous again ! |
Warrio
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 09:48:00 -
[14]
Why would you consider Eve to be "wrong" and the others such as Star Wars to be right?
More people have put more collective time into adjusting and creating the story of Eve than into those other imaginary spaceship worlds so I'd say;
Why are the ships in Star Wars and the like so small?
sXe |
TraininVain
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 09:51:00 -
[15]
I kind of like the scale of everything. It's quite impressive when you fly close to something.
The only real problems I have with scale are when your ship spins around like origami getting washed down a drain.
|
Nico Terces
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:00:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Nico Terces on 13/05/2009 10:01:33
Edited by: Nico Terces on 13/05/2009 10:00:46
Originally by: Sylar McIntyr
Well, gravity is not restricted to planets and ist not like duct tape and sracp metal make good sniper weapons
Anyway i would appreciate mor guns (visually only, NO ingame effect) for mor lights and so
Yeah that you get like 2 guns added to one highslot. They're actually 1 gun, but do both shoot. They're also linked in miss-chance and hitchance, and damage is received as if u get shot by 1 gunslot. Nothing changes apart from the feeling that you're loaded to your teeth and beyond :D
And I know there's gravity everywhere, but those scrapmetal-ducttape gunbuilders do have the ability to make warpdrives and doomsday devices. Is it so hard to make a proper rifle? :P
|
Leiara Knight
Gallente
The Oblivion Guard
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:05:00 -
[17]
That's why Almighty Zeus gave you the gift of imagination.
|
Schayol Sunkeeper
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:34:00 -
[18]
the only thing that bugs me about eve spacecraft is the lack of flak. it gets really silly when you look at post battleship size ships. a titan with decent weaponry ? noooooooo hurr durr 6 highslots only durr. okay it's a gameplay issue. because the way it would be realistic, there would be no use for sub battleship sized vessels anymore.
as for star wars ships: they are about the same size than eve ships. ISD's are about the size of eve battleships and are used in a similar way. the executor class SSD is about the same size than eve titans. fightercrafts are a lot smaller than eve drones though, but that's mainly because they need to be very VERY fast to dodge flak fire and hit weak spots on enemy ships. since we don't have any flak whatsoever in eve for above reasons, there is no need for ultra small fast ships. drones do the job good enough.
as for weapon ranges. in space there is no friction, so ballistic weapons ( everything except lasers ) should have no max range. however there are other things that need to be considered ( heavy guessing goes in here ):
a) targeting systems may have a range. space is mainly a large area of blank black space with a few yellow dots on it. it is incredibly difficult to spot anything in it. try for once on a empty spot to find a friends ship that is 100+ km away from you, with your interface off. if you can't see it, you can't hit it
b) guns may not aimed accurate enough. simply because of mechanical reasons, if you for example only can adjust the gun in half degree steps, there is a given max range in which a ship can hide between that half of degree.
c) missiles may need a self destruct button. okay missiles are guided, self propelled bombs. since they won't brake ever in space, it's maybe not a good idea to leave missed missiles floating in space, they may hit something anytime. so there maybe is a self destruct function after fuel ran out.
d) lasers may dissolve after time, hybrids may destabilize after time, as in: the projectile slowly loses it's "charge"
e) gravity effects of nearby planets / stars may affect the flight path to the point where you can't hit over a certain range ( everything beside missiles )
f) angular velocity may become too high to predict forestalling accurately enough ( aiming at where the target will be, instead of where it is )
g) recoil / vibration of kinetic weaponry ( everything beside lasers ) may become too much for stabilising systems to compensate ( seems good to me because we in fact HAVE stabilisers for hybrids and projectiles )
this post is too long
|
Tesh Sevateem
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:34:00 -
[19]
It annoys me a bit that our ships are so immensely huge. Sometimes, it looks as if the ship model was designed with a specific scale in mind. Then when the skin was applied, little tiny windows were added making the ship look, perhaps, 10 times bigger. I have a hard time imagining the sheer size of a Cruiser - let alone a Dreadnought. There really is no reason to make them so huge - better to make frigates rather small - perhaps 8-10 meters instead of the current 40. A super-duper huge ship should be no more than one kilometer in length.
Do you have any idea how much it would cost to create an advanced ship 13 kilometres long, containing facilities for thousands of crew members and electronic systems?
A car today may cost $10,000.00. How much does the steering wheel cost? How much does the exhaust pipe cost? A car is about 3 meters long. Now imagine a frigate being 15 times as big. How much does the paper bin in your captain's office cost? How much does the ceiling fan in your captain's bedroom cost? The problem is that with a cost of perhaps 30,000.00 ISK for a frigate, the price for a pack of 6 eggs in the local supermarket would be impossible to even measure in ISK "cents". A frigate which is 40 meters long would have to cost many, many millions. Otherwise, the economic system only works on a certain size object and larger.
I know it's a game, but to me, the immensely huge size of ships doesn't add anything "cool" or whatever - it just adds distance to the illusion. I'd personally love to see a reduction of the ship sizes by a factor 10. Ship models can be kept, they "just" need a new skin, and all stat values that involve the size of a ship or module reduced by a factor 10. It's still not a problem to shoot 40km with artillery.
|
Tuncan
Minmatar
Mortis Angelus
The Church.
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:43:00 -
[20]
You have a crew for all ships. Shuttles are the only ships that are used by 1 pilot.
So if a frigs is 10 meters that would be an orgy =)
|
|
|
Schayol Sunkeeper
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:54:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Tesh Sevateem
text goes in here
most frigades are only a bit larger than modern civilian aircraft. so they would definately purchasable, if you got some thousand planets to fuel your economy
also players are portrayed as half gods for beeing able to use the pod system so you can assume "we" are in the upper class of civilisation
|
GyokZoli
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:55:00 -
[22]
Originally by: TimMc
Why so big? Because its awesome. Look at this image of all the eve ships for scale.
Hmm, what are these ships and where can be found?
Eidolon, Phantom, Visitant, Specter, Wraith
Are these sleeper ships?
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:58:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Tippia on 13/05/2009 10:59:35
Originally by: Tesh Sevateem
Now imagine a frigate being 15 times as big. How much does the paper bin in your captain's office cost? How much does the ceiling fan in your captain's bedroom cost? The problem is that with a cost of perhaps 30,000.00 ISK for a frigate, the price for a pack of 6 eggs in the local supermarket would be impossible to even measure in ISK "cents".
I'm fairly certain that the lore explains this by saying that it's called Interstellar Credits for a reason: you use it for the kinds of large-scale economy that exists between solar systems and planets, not as something you use to pop down to the shop for a pack of smokes.
…well, barring that silly "go fetch me some smokes" L1 mission, of course 
Originally by: GyokZoli
Hmm, what are these ships and where can be found?
Eidolon, Phantom, Visitant, Specter, Wraith
Are these sleeper ships?
Jove.
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Jita Jenn
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 11:15:00 -
[24]
I actually like the scale of ships in EVE. What bugs me is the size of turrets compared to the ships they're on. Small guns look ok on destroyers but look ridiculous on frigs (Rifters are a good example). Medium guns a bit small on battlecruisers and look ok on cruisers. Large guns are way too small on battleships. Not sure what guns look like on bigger ships but I'd say it's a similar situation.
|
Irida Mershkov
Gallente
War is Bliss
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 11:22:00 -
[25]
The thing that bugs me the most, is that frigates, which are well, frigates, and are pretty big, a Rifter is about the size of a 747 if I remember correctly. Yet, they maneuver like fighters.
|
Kazang
Gallente
Wrecking Shots
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 11:30:00 -
[26]
Your called JAME5 KIRK so im going to assume your familiar with star trek, and how big those ships are? How many guns did the Enterprize have? Only 2 forward and 2 aft if i remember correctly, but big, ****ing huge lazers. The Enterprize isn't a battleship class craft, its more of a large crusier, and is 600 odd metres long which is about the size of a small BS in EVE, a raven is around 600 metres long.
That is more the scale eve was going for, star wars uses a different scale totally, the larger ships needed lots of small guns since the smaller (one man lol) ships where so imba that they could take out entire stations with one shot  so the smaller guns where needed to take out the small ships.
Eve ships are so big and realistic in the way that they are not designed with gaping weaknesses, so that small one man craft similar to a light drone EVE would barely scratch the larger craft. Consider aswell that an EVE artillery barrel can be 1400mm in bore for a ship length of 1000m, and compare that to a modern sea faring Battleships with around 600mm cannons, with the ships up to 300m long. Which would have 4-8 batteries of the large guns. The proportions seem pretty good to me based on realistic info.
Kazang
|
Zaerlorth Maelkor
The Maverick Navy
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 11:48:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Tesh Sevateem
A car today may cost $10,000.00. How much does the steering wheel cost? How much does the exhaust pipe cost? A car is about 3 meters long. Now imagine a frigate being 15 times as big. How much does the paper bin in your captain's office cost? How much does the ceiling fan in your captain's bedroom cost? The problem is that with a cost of perhaps 30,000.00 ISK for a frigate, the price for a pack of 6 eggs in the local supermarket would be impossible to even measure in ISK "cents". A frigate which is 40 meters long would have to cost many, many millions. Otherwise, the economic system only works on a certain size object and larger.
There is a reason for this. Isk are not used locally as currency. Each planet has their own currency which is perhaps 10.000 to 1 isk. This is all explained in the backstory/chronicles.
==================================================
I should really get a sig. |
SFX Bladerunner
Minmatar
Black Serpent Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 11:54:00 -
[28]
Originally by: TimMc
Why so big? Because its awesome. Look at this image of all the eve ships for scale.
That has to be the most awesome thing I have EVAR seen.
I want a 2 meters high poster of that
__________________________________________________
History is much like an endless waltz, the three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.. |
Meiyang Lee
Gallente
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 12:02:00 -
[29]
Originally by: JAME5 KIRK
After briefly perusing several genre specific encyclopedia's and then using eve's new view item tool, one thing stands out to me.
EVE's ships are huge compared to other genre's and have relatively little weaponry (i know this makes for easier gameplay).
The orca for example is the size of a star destroyer (victory class original movie), yet these ship are relatively easy to build.
Even a shuttle is 40m long thats the size of 3 articulated lorries (nearly).
Does anyone think a rescaling of ships may be in order to make small ships small and the bigger ships bigger etc.
input appreciated.
For fun and profit, because it's awesome.
There are settings that use larger (and also MUCH larger vessels) for their starships, so EVE's aren't exactly exceptional.
Culture GSVs range from dozens to hundreds of kilometres in length, they are home to billions of people and carry the most advanced AIs imaginable.
Warhammer 40,000 starships of the line range from a mile to about 5 miles in length with crews in the 10s of thousands and guns that fire shells the size of buildings and torpedoes the size of skysc****rs. (ie. EVE weapons are downright small-fry to these ships)
even in settings that generally use smaller ships (Star Trek: Voyager for instance) there are much larger ships around. Borg Cubes and Saurian City ships among others. Or Babylon 5 Deep Space Explorer ships. (Or Vorlon/Shadow Planetkillers)
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 12:45:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Jagga Spikes on 13/05/2009 12:45:11
game balance. that's that.
just think of the fun having 1000 meter long BS with a proportional cargo space to a 60 meter frigate. 600,000 m3, anyone?
|
|
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 12:54:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Nico Terces
What I dont understand is how projectile size scales to range... I mean a proper artillery cannon can fire say what, 40 km distance on earth, which is in a parabolic trajectory.
Now, our eve guns fire like 50 km without advanced skills and technology... That's not very far in space, where there's almost no gravity or friction.
Basically I would like to see the distances increased by a factor 10 on everything, range, falloff, speed, whatever. Just to make the scales a bit more decent. It also makes me at least think that space-enterprising humanity did find some technological improvements on weaponry.
Earth based artillery isn't normally used to hit moving targets - and accuracy usually isn't an issue. "Close" is close enough when you're going to dig a hole in the ground 5 feet across.
Eve weapons on the other hand are generally being fire at moving targets, which means you have to aim where you think the target is going to be, rather than where they are = and woe betide you if they change direction. If anything EVE weapons should be less accurate that they are are now.
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it. |
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 13:17:00 -
[32]
personally, i think EVE ships are too big. in real life, problem with large ships is not production cost, but maintenance. this is the reason there are no more active battleships. even USA packed their big guns. as there is no maintenance cost in EVE, there is proliferation of large size vessels.
my view of "realistic" military space fleet:
<50m small ships: fighters, bombers, dropships
100-200m medium ships: front line combat vessels (EVE's frigates to battleships)
500-1000+m large ships: fire support, mobile bases, carriers
also, civilian ships should be bigger than military. civilians are rarely concerned with being a target, and a bigger ship is a better target.
tho, i doubt EVE will get rescaling, tho, some ships could really use it: stabber/cruiser 240m, thrasher/destroyer 300m?
|
Schayol Sunkeeper
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 13:48:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Jagga Spikes
personally, i think EVE ships are too big. in real life, problem with large ships is not production cost, but maintenance. this is the reason there are no more active battleships. even USA packed their big guns. as there is no maintenance cost in EVE, there is proliferation of large size vessels.
my view of "realistic" military space fleet:
<50m small ships: fighters, bombers, dropships
100-200m medium ships: front line combat vessels (EVE's frigates to battleships)
500-1000+m large ships: fire support, mobile bases, carriers
also, civilian ships should be bigger than military. civilians are rarely concerned with being a target, and a bigger ship is a better target.
tho, i doubt EVE will get rescaling, tho, some ships could really use it: stabber/cruiser 240m, thrasher/destroyer 300m?
the reason there are no battleships anymore is because they could be sunk by a single bomber nowadays. the effective ranges naval fleets are battleing ( IF they were battleing ) is way beyond anything a classic battleship can achieve. if you absolutely have to use a ship to fight other ships, missile frigades are your choice, because of range.
"my" view on "realistic" spaceship combat is this:
as small as possible: bombers, interceptors and the likes, that can target weak spots on enemy ships and are able to dodge gunfire from them, hence the small size, while the latter provide the primary means to defend against the first. also scouts go in here.
big: carriers, which are mobile command bases and hangars for fightercraft
that's about it. i don't thing there will be fancy epic space fights with lots of battleships all in visible range for the audience pleasure.
|
kleinstaff
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 13:55:00 -
[34]
Ever asked yourself about crew ?are you alone in your ship or do you have a crew with you ?...
i ve been asking myself that ever since i started playing this game
|
Schayol Sunkeeper
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:11:00 -
[35]
Originally by: kleinstaff
Ever asked yourself about crew ?are you alone in your ship or do you have a crew with you ?...
i ve been asking myself that ever since i started playing this game
i think it is stated that player ships have much less of a crew than "Non pod" ships, mainly because the pod pilot can operate a ship mainly on its own. the crew is mainly for maintenance reasons, whereras npc ships need a much larger crew to even be able to fly a ship, but they never get as good as a pod pilot, that's why npc tend to be so weak
|
Forsilvra
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:13:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Forsilvra on 13/05/2009 14:16:01
Edited by: Forsilvra on 13/05/2009 14:15:08
Originally by: kleinstaff
Ever asked yourself about crew ?are you alone in your ship or do you have a crew with you ?...
i ve been asking myself that ever since i started playing this game
According to the lore you do have a crew with you but because of your capsule you only require a skeleton crew to operate your ship, compared to a much larger crew for non capsuleer captains. Also because of the capsule little interaction occurs between you and your crew. As for numbers, according to this, frigates may not even need a crew whereas according to this a battleship can have many thousands of crew onboard.
Makes you think about the huge numbers of pirate crew members we must destroy on a regular basis  but who needs a conscience anyway? 
Edit: stuffed up the links
|
WhoKillingWho
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:30:00 -
[37]
I think if you want to talk about scaling, effective range of travel becomes a concern also? Does it not seem wrong that the small ships are able to traverse thru the multi star system trips they can with out pause or refuel? I think if there was a limit to flight range of smaller craft it would give a bigger sence of scale. However, I believe its not used as it would force the bigger use of alts for the average player to undergo simple trips. |
Kusum Fawn
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:33:00 -
[38]
Size of ship? meh, it doesnt make a real difference cause of the lack of Line of sight shooting, i usually dont even know how big my ship is relative to other ships,
I think the AA and flack issues for Battlecruisers and up are a valid point, but it is a real game play issue, mostly about over powering larger ships to the detriment of smaller ships. Honestly i think thats the way it should be, but a single bs in a belt can flipping would be way overpowered to the noobs hes killing, realistically on a ship that large you should have quite a few smaller guns, my mega is 1017 m thats pretty big to not have aa guns somewhere, even real bs's had a large variety of smaller guns,
(using the bismarck as an example which was only 251 meters long)
Armament:
* 8 + 380 mm/L52 SK C/34 (4+2)
* 12 + 150 mm/L55 SK-C/28 (6+2)
* 16 + 105 mm/L65 SK-C/37 / SK-C/33 (8+2)
* 16 + 37 mm/L83 SK-C/30
* 12 + 20 mm/L65 MG C/30
* 8 + 20 mm/L65 MG C/32 (8+4)
You can see the difference.
Understandably This wont happen in this game, (at least not for a long long time, think of the fleet battles with that many weapons!) but having more then 8 hislots has been a gripe for a long time, Id like more hislots or possibly size designated slots, like 6 small type slots 4 medium slots 4 large slots and 4 utility slots but perhaps in the future,
(to implement these changes are a programming nightmare that i dont even want to consider much less figure out the balancing changes)
|
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:48:00 -
[39]
Whilst you can't obviously have ships that work like real ones in terms of armament (i.e. in the real World if you did manage to hit a rowing boat with a torpedo it would be obliterated, it wouldn't take less damage because it's small) you could make weapons at least feel more rewarding as you go up in ship size.
I'd like to see lasers that look like they do in those promo vids, right now battleship guns don't really look or sound that impressive.
|
Enden Assulu
Caldari
Blood Money Inc.
Blood Money Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:49:00 -
[40]
Hi
|
|
|
WhoKillingWho
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:52:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Kusum Fawn
Size of ship? meh, it doesnt make a real difference cause of the lack of Line of sight shooting, i usually dont even know how big my ship is relative to other ships,
I think the AA and flack issues for Battlecruisers and up are a valid point, but it is a real game play issue, mostly about over powering larger ships to the detriment of smaller ships. Honestly i think thats the way it should be, but a single bs in a belt can flipping would be way overpowered to the noobs hes killing, realistically on a ship that large you should have quite a few smaller guns, my mega is 1017 m thats pretty big to not have aa guns somewhere, even real bs's had a large variety of smaller guns,
(using the bismarck as an example which was only 251 meters long)
Armament:
* 8 + 380 mm/L52 SK C/34 (4+2)
* 12 + 150 mm/L55 SK-C/28 (6+2)
* 16 + 105 mm/L65 SK-C/37 / SK-C/33 (8+2)
* 16 + 37 mm/L83 SK-C/30
* 12 + 20 mm/L65 MG C/30
* 8 + 20 mm/L65 MG C/32 (8+4)
You can see the difference.
Understandably This wont happen in this game, (at least not for a long long time, think of the fleet battles with that many weapons!) but having more then 8 hislots has been a gripe for a long time, Id like more hislots or possibly size designated slots, like 6 small type slots 4 medium slots 4 large slots and 4 utility slots but perhaps in the future,
(to implement these changes are a programming nightmare that i dont even want to consider much less figure out the balancing changes)
I dont think it would be you could just change the Powergrid requirement of weapons so you could only fit 1-3 large turrents, 1-3 meds on a battle ship, and make it viable to use them as such in the current high slots avaible. While i believe most ships fitting dont support mixing of small/med/large/XL I have faith it could be figured out. I think the real problem with it is why have BS attacking frigates in fleets? I think the scale of fleets in eve is what really kills the idea. But I think its a good thing that it does. Making the need to bring a more diverse fleet is a good requirement.
|
Neroy v2
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:57:00 -
[42]
I didn't read all the comments but here's my view on this.
The biggest achievment on many games is getting a realistic size on stuff so some things in the game don't look totally "wrong".
But if CCP were to resize all the ships, that's like making an entire new Tranquility server. Resizing ships means Bigger ships->All structures need to be rescaled.(if you shrink stuff but don't increase it might not be to much hassle though)
Artillery only flies 50km in space? True, it isn't far. No doubt anyone that puts a little thought into game mechanics see's those things.Fire in space *caugh*
But like said above if they change the range and stuff, they need to change a lot of other factors too.
I don't think you'd have fun making a whole new calculator that does all the math for how stuff like damage is affected by speed and so on.(I call it a calculator I'm not a game engineer)
Something cropped up with Battleships not being needed if they make mega ass ships?Well even the most badass huge ship can be fried by something much smaller.
I accually feel stupid for having to say that
Look at modern warfare in the military.
I don't wanna write a ton so in short, if you want a Eve-Online with bigger scale and more factors realistic to how Outer space is then you can tell CCP to kick the bucket on Tranquility and make a new Eve online shard/realm. In the end its still a GAME and there isn't one thats perfect yet.
Oh but the thing with the drones really surprised me lol. A light drone is 30(!!!) meters long. Holy fing **** lol. Fighters are tiny then since you can see the human pilot in some of them(or was it only in one of them)
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 14:58:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Schayol Sunkeeper
Originally by: Jagga Spikes
...
the reason there are no battleships anymore is because they could be sunk by a single bomber nowadays. the effective ranges naval fleets are battleing ( IF they were battleing ) is way beyond anything a classic battleship can achieve. if you absolutely have to use a ship to fight other ships, missile frigades are your choice, because of range.
...
by your line of thinking, all RL sub-carrier ships should be decommissioned, since if battleship can be sunk, so can anything smaller, which is not happening. there is still need for mid-sized escort-type vessels, which are quite cost-effective to deploy (both on tactical and strategic level).
basically:
small: firepower+speed
medium: firepower+defense
large: defense+utility(hangars, support, etc)
|
TimMc
Gallente
Brutal Deliverance
Blackguard Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 15:09:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Forsilvra
Makes you think about the huge numbers of pirate crew members we must destroy on a regular basis but who needs a conscience anyway?
NPC pirates arent pod pilots, so you must be killing effective small towns of people when you pop each battleship.
|
SpaceSquirrels
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 15:14:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
The thing that bugs me the most, is that frigates, which are well, frigates, and are pretty big, a Rifter is about the size of a 747 if I remember correctly. Yet, they maneuver like fighters.
Frigates in RL are just smaller than destroyers.
Frig: 445 feet (133.5 meters); 453 feet
Destro: (DDG 51-78): 505 feet (153.92 meters)(DDG 79 AF): 509+ feet (155.29 meters).
Cruisers: Length: 567 feet.
Though in space with no drag, gravity and structures like they are ships would be more nimble. Guess it would be more mass dependent.
_________________________
I disagree... |
Shadow Devourer
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 15:26:00 -
[46]
Battleships still had a use for coastal bombardment. See Irak 1.
Thankfully these days we have those crazy russians to keep us entertained with their giant nuclear powered missile battlecruisers.
|
Faith d'Amarr
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 15:28:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Meiyang Lee
There are settings that use larger (and also MUCH larger vessels) for their starships, so EVE's aren't exactly exceptional.
Culture GSVs range from dozens to hundreds of kilometres in length, they are home to billions of people and carry the most advanced AIs imaginable.
And even these are small fry when compared to e.g. the Uta class of vessels (of which Dahak is one) from David Weber's Dahak/Fifth Imperium. A shapeship which primary mode of concealment in a star system is to destroy a moon and disguise itself as said celestial object. (Who needs a cloaking device? :D)
I think the morale of the story is that whatever any of us think of as big ships, somebody, somewhere, has written them bigger. :)
|
Misaniovent
Blood Phage Syndicate
Dominatus Atrum Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 16:02:00 -
[48]
Originally by: TimMc
Why so big? Because its awesome. Look at this image of all the eve ships for scale.
But according to the preview function, a Geddon is 500m and an Apoc is 800m.
|
Kusum Fawn
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 16:04:00 -
[49]
Originally by: WhoKillingWho
Originally by: Kusum Fawn
(to implement these changes are a programming nightmare that i dont even want to consider much less figure out the balancing changes)
I dont think it would be you could just change the Powergrid requirement of weapons so you could only fit 1-3 large turrents, 1-3 meds on a battle ship, and make it viable to use them as such in the current high slots avaible. While i believe most ships fitting dont support mixing of small/med/large/XL I have faith it could be figured out. I think the real problem with it is why have BS attacking frigates in fleets? I think the scale of fleets in eve is what really kills the idea. But I think its a good thing that it does. Making the need to bring a more diverse fleet is a good requirement.
that wouldnt work, as you need the amount of grid to fit tank as well (well some people tank) which could be turned around and used for more guns, (as is already done) lowering the pg wouldnt make using smaller sized weapons all that viable, at least not any more then it already is, plus fitting mods would just become necessary for any pvp ship, having designated slots for smaller weapons would make it so you dont waste a large weapon hislot for a smaller weapon,
think about the classic pve Megathron fit 7x rails + reps, with the designated medium slots it wouldnt take from that fit, but rather augment it with anti-Cruiser ability (at close range) and anti frigate ability (at even closer range)
Meh, |
Amitious Turkey
Gallente
Ammo Tech Inc
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 16:30:00 -
[50]
I-like
big
SHIPS and i can-not lie...
I think big ships go better w/ space. Space is hughe, why not the ships? 
On another note, I would like to say I got an annoying sig. Protest the lack of spacing between signature and post content!
Do you like the bunny head? (\_/) (I lost him :( )
|
|
|
Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 16:30:00 -
[51]
Get in a capsule and move very close to a parked BS, you'll see the scale then!
-----------------
Friends Forever |
STARRAVENN
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 20:53:00 -
[52]
This is a fracking rpg game that have hundreds of illogical aspects in it. For example, skill effects cargo capacity of a ship, bigger guns damages less to the smaller targets, no need of fuel to moving in space etc.
And you only worried about the size of the ships? Man if you are looking for a sci-fi game, eve is the wrong address. Eve suits more likely a fantasy literature which has hobbits, orcs, elfs and other ****s.
|
Chris Liath
Gallente
Nex Exercitus
Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 21:06:00 -
[53]
Because bigger is better.
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic. |
Chris Liath
Gallente
Nex Exercitus
Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 21:11:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor
Originally by: Tesh Sevateem
A car today may cost $10,000.00. How much does the steering wheel cost? How much does the exhaust pipe cost? A car is about 3 meters long. Now imagine a frigate being 15 times as big. How much does the paper bin in your captain's office cost? How much does the ceiling fan in your captain's bedroom cost? The problem is that with a cost of perhaps 30,000.00 ISK for a frigate, the price for a pack of 6 eggs in the local supermarket would be impossible to even measure in ISK "cents". A frigate which is 40 meters long would have to cost many, many millions. Otherwise, the economic system only works on a certain size object and larger.
There is a reason for this. Isk are not used locally as currency. Each planet has their own currency which is perhaps 10.000 to 1 isk. This is all explained in the backstory/chronicles.
They say a family may aspire to accumulate 10 isk during their lifetime. May.
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic. |
Grek Forto
Malevolent Intentions
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 21:12:00 -
[55]
My biggest gripe with ships sized is that Capital ships are too SMALL. I mean, a Thanatos can carry, what, two battleships. Still a single Megathron doesn't seem to fit in it. Either make all sub-capitals smaller or make the capital bigger, imho. Also, frigate guns are too big.
Originally by: Stitcher
It's "Caldari", not "Caldarians". One Caldari, three Caldari, all the Caldari are doing Caldari things using Caldari tools in a Caldari way.
|
Renesis Maximus
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 21:14:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Renesis Maximus on 13/05/2009 21:15:35
Edited by: Renesis Maximus on 13/05/2009 21:14:44
Originally by: STARRAVENN
This is a fracking rpg game that have hundreds of illogical aspects in it. For example, skill effects cargo capacity of a ship, bigger guns damages less to the smaller targets, no need of fuel to moving in space etc.
And you only worried about the size of the ships? Man if you are looking for a sci-fi game, eve is the wrong address. Eve suits more likely a fantasy literature which has hobbits, orcs, elfs and other ****s.
Well, sci-fi fits this perfectly, anyway....
Skill for cargo: You are better at using up all the available space. It's like a puzzle, so when you have a better cargo skill, you can fit the pieces of the puzzle better.
Bigger Guns damaging smaller targets less: This is because it will not hit the smaller target directly, and since the projectiles are just that, it would be a "glancing blow" instead of a full-on hit. It's not like real world artillary where you don't need to hit it to do damage. There is no ground to create a crater, thus no collateral damage from a missed shot. Same goes with missiles, except going faster than the explosion velocity would render you harmless because none of the debris or the compression wave is hitting you. I guarantee you, however, that a large Blaster does great damage to a stationary capsule. Don't believe me? I'm hanging out in Ane...we can test this ourselves.
No Fuel Needed: perhaps the drives are fusion powered? In that case, a very small amount of very common, easily attainable material can be utalized to power the ships. Remeber, any significantly advanced technology will appear as magic to the uninitiated.
|
1600 RT
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 22:17:00 -
[57]
the prewiew thing is so bugged atm, hurricane longer than maelstrom. 
|
quave
Caldari
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 22:35:00 -
[58]
sense of scale Rohk vs car close up
sense of scale Rohk vs car zoom out
sense of scale spot the gman
Made in gmod, Someone else extracted the models from eve. I had to use the biggest map available, even so when i tried this with a hyperion the game broke .
|
Rekatan
Caldari
Pure Ground Black Pepper
|
Posted - 2009.05.14 12:37:00 -
[59]
Really guys?? This is what you have to ***** about???
Ok.. Ive got a great idea. Go to a star trek convention, spend 8 straight hours *****ing over who's better kirk or picard, then once you've got all that nerd rage outta yer system come on back to the forums.
|
Tesh Sevateem
|
Posted - 2009.05.14 13:08:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Rekatan
Really guys?? This is what you have to ***** about???
Ok.. Ive got a great idea. Go to a star trek convention, spend 8 straight hours *****ing over who's better kirk or picard, then once you've got all that nerd rage outta yer system come on back to the forums.
I'm not *****ing about anything. But this is a forum, a place to exchange ideas and thoughts. I personally think the ships are way too large, other people disagree with me. Fine. I now also, thanks to some friendly people who chose to share this information with me, know that ISK is not the common form of currency for Mr and Mrs Smith working at the local Quick-e-Mart on Jita.
The only one *****ing here, is you.
|
|
|
MarieFrance Tessier
|
Posted - 2009.05.14 13:32:00 -
[61]
Edited by: MarieFrance Tessier on 14/05/2009 13:32:06
Originally by: quave
sense of scale Rohk vs car close up
sense of scale Rohk vs car zoom out
sense of scale spot the gman
Made in gmod, Someone else extracted the models from eve. I had to use the biggest map available, even so when i tried this with a hyperion the game broke .
Goddamnit, so much, that makes me want to live in a spaceship. I think my favorite house in the game would be the large villa on top of the Hurricaine. (pretty much the area with three sweeps of light coming out each direction).
And yes, LOTS of backstory mentions that pod pilots are unimaginably rich. The currency we use is way beyond the needs of the average civilian, even cents.
|
JAME5 KIRK
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 16:44:00 -
[62]
i'd like to thank everyone for their input on this, some valid points and somethings i hadnt even thought of.
If ayone has anymore, keep them coming.
|
Asuka Smith
Gallente
StarHunt
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 18:22:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Tippia
I'm fairly certain that the lore explains this by saying that it's called Interstellar Credits for a reason: you use it for the kinds of large-scale economy that exists between solar systems and planets, not as something you use to pop down to the shop for a pack of smokes
Here I thought that it stood for Icelandic Kroner, you sure you read your version in the lore?
|
Jat Goodwin
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 18:32:00 -
[64]
"Space, is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it is. I mean you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space."
|
Holy Lowlander
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 19:10:00 -
[65]
I would love to have a rupture with 24 autocannons on every side in different sizes and 15 missle bays a long with small 1-man fighters zooming around.
Or better yet an avatar with thousands of freaking laser beams.
|
Merdorn
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 20:06:00 -
[66]
In regaurds to missels running out of fuel, To be honest with the amount of power it takes to fit a Luancher (a metal rack in the simpelest set up) almost all of the speed is coming from the luancher itself and how fast it flings the missle (its a really large bore gun). the fuel in the missle would only be used for course corrections and as such should last a good deal longer then it does now, as only a rather small RCS system would be needed save for all but the terminal stage of its flight (the luancher lobs it in the right section of space, the RCS get it to that space, then the terminal stage is when it light up and slams in to its target).
To be honest though Projectial weps would beable to have the same sort of set up. A RCS system onboard to correct for not beable to point right at something. I am not talking about full on guidences, maybe just a rudamentery keep on this line of flight type thing (like a slight hook shot). But with no resistance the only thing that would have to be added in is time.
In a perfict type setting, the ranges for wep systems would be this order
Missle
Projectial
Hybrid
Lasers
In that beams are restricted to the turrent only for aiming, and hybrids would loss charge over time.
Now in this soup that is the eve, this seems to not apply. Missles must keep there motor on all the time to maintain speed, projectials of both types lose any resembalince of prodictable flight path over the span of a hundered K, But beams seem to be Unphased by the galatic soup. They maintain there coohesion for almost there entire usefull distance, instead of dropping in damage the further you get from point of origin. This must be becouse they get focus at the point of impact (so in a perfect of imperfect world they would have the same range). But to impose the enviroment on 3 of the 4 wep systems seems wrong.
|
Marquis Jeladriel
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 20:11:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Jat Goodwin
"Space, is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it is. I mean you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space."
Kudos for the Douglas Adams quote
|
Merdorn
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 20:27:00 -
[68]
On the topic of the smaller ships (like the enterprise) having less weps, that is mostly wrong. What thay had where banks of weps but also firing arcs. So for the most part not all weps on a ship could be brought to bear on any one target Maybe 75% to 90% dependig on ship layout. The original trek ship had atlest 16 phasers spreed in 8 twin gun turns that faced the cardnel directions with pretty much 90 degree firing arcs (4 banks for the lower hemisphire and 4 banks for the upper hemisphere). Most you could get on you at any one time was up to 2 banks normally, or 4 on the boarder between arcs and at the Equatorial line. so max of 8 guns. Also the ship had Torp tubes, aranged both forward and aft (again they had arcs) that could only fire mostly just forward and aft. But the tubes where not just one tube but a bank of lunchers as well with 2 pointing forward (2 tubes with 2 luanchers sharing one tube) and a rear bank with 2 luanchers. So 6 total torp tubes.
So counted up you have 16 guns and 6 missles. Way more then a eve ship. Now granted that that ship was a NCC or New Command Cruser so eqivalent to a BC in eve. ALso the missles it fired was the same ones fired by smaller firgeats and Destroyers just it was able to fire more at one time. That was one of the benifitest was it gave the Federations frigetes the punch of ships much larger in size just lacked the staying power or the ammo. Thouse torps did the same damage no matter who fired them. Again EVE do not alow for this as giving a race advantage like this to a race would not work, as everyone can fly everything.
|
stoicfaux
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 22:26:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Nico Terces
What I dont understand is how projectile size scales to range... I mean a proper artillery cannon can fire say what, 40 km distance on earth, which is in a parabolic trajectory.
Now, our eve guns fire like 50 km without advanced skills and technology... That's not very far in space, where there's almost no gravity or friction.
You're so missing the magic about artillery in Eve. RL artillery can take several seconds to hit at range. A 155 mm howitzer has a muzzle velocity of 563 m/s (or 0.563 km/s.) In fact, modern artillery can fire half a dozen rounds at different angles and have them arrive on target at the same time. The M-1 tank's gun fires at 1580 m/s for an 8km range. By comparison, artillery guns in Eve hit instantly. So at 50km, with say, a .001 second flight time, an Eve artillery shell is traveling at least 50,000 kilometers per second.
155m howitzer -> 0.563 km/s
M-1 120mm -> 1.58 km/s
Eve Artillery -> 50,000 km/s.
What is really interesting is when you compare Eve muzzle speeds to the speed of light:
Laser traveling at speed of light (300,000 km/s) can cover 300km in .001 seconds
Rokh w/ 425mm Railgun II with Spike Ammo can cover 224km in .001 sconds.
An Eve hybrid round is traveling at 75% of the speed of light. (Assuming a .001 second shell travel speed. (Some math wiz can probably calculate a reasonable flight time based on maximum ship speeds.)) If you lengthen the flight time to .01 seconds, the hybrid round is going at 7% of the speed of light, which is still impressive.
Long story short, guns and artillery in Eve are in no way based on real world guns and artillery (or physics as we understand them,) therefore drawing any kind of comparisons or making assumptions between Eve and RL tech is pointless. (Seriously, can you imagine what kind of power source/propellant would be required to get a shell up to 7% of the speed of light at the squeeze of a trigger?)
|
Lisento Slaven
The Drekla Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.05.16 22:37:00 -
[70]
Why do we have so few guns on our ships you ask?
The guns/weapons are insanely powerful. That's like saying 8 nukes isn't enough. Hell..a flameburst light missile is probably enough to devastate a city block.
---
Put in space whales!
|
|
|
Nelan Khalem
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 08:35:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Lisento Slaven
Why do we have so few guns on our ships you ask?
The guns/weapons are insanely powerful. That's like saying 8 nukes isn't enough. Hell..a flameburst light missile is probably enough to devastate a city block.
Yes, our ammo are nuclear weapons.
And realistic spacefight would take place at thousand of kilometers, at speeds higer than 15km/s, and accelerating would take the same time than decelerating. (a reallistic spacefight simulation would be fun to play with :p)
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 11:17:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Lisento Slaven
Why do we have so few guns on our ships you ask?
The guns/weapons are insanely powerful. That's like saying 8 nukes isn't enough. Hell..a flameburst light missile is probably enough to devastate a city block.
actually, EVE weapons are underpowered. modern (20-th century) weapons philosophy is "one shot-one kill". basically, it takes one solid hit to disable a target of equal size. but, that would be no fun, would it?
|
Lisento Slaven
The Drekla Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 15:23:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Jagga Spikes
actually, EVE weapons are underpowered. modern (20-th century) weapons philosophy is "one shot-one kill". basically, it takes one solid hit to disable a target of equal size. but, that would be no fun, would it?
They're not underpowered...defensive systems in EVE are overpowered. Even structure in EVE is more powerful then any armor plating in the "real world".
---
Put in space whales!
|
Vade Katana
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 16:59:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Vade Katana on 17/05/2009 17:00:57
Originally by: quave
sense of scale Rohk vs car close up
sense of scale Rohk vs car zoom out
sense of scale spot the gman
Made in gmod, Someone else extracted the models from eve. I had to use the biggest map available, even so when i tried this with a hyperion the game broke .
aha thx for posting those pictures, i havent played gmod in a while so im downloading those models. Thx :D
|
stoicfaux
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 17:20:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Jagga Spikes
actually, EVE weapons are underpowered. modern (20-th century) weapons philosophy is "one shot-one kill". basically, it takes one solid hit to disable a target of equal size. but, that would be no fun, would it?
actually, EVE weapons are underpowered. modern (20-th century) weapons philosophy is "one shot-one kill". basically, it takes one solid hit to disable a target of equal size. but, that would be no fun, would it?
Bad analogy. How often do navy ships one shot kill each other?
Eve ships are tough:
Collisions between ships in Eve don't do any damage. Being flipped around so quickly after a collision doesn't kill the crew by plastering them against the bulkheads either. That pretty much implies that Eve ships are immune to kinetic kill weapons. In the real world, if we could accelerate a slug as fast as an Eve hybrid round can travel, we would rely on just kinetic energy to get the kill. However, being immune to collision damage makes Eve ships immune to real world guns.
And realistically, Eve Artillery cannons do not use the propellant to accelerate the shell. I'm not a ballistic or physics expert, but I'm fairly sure that a chemical explosion would never expand fast enough to accelerate a slug to a speed that is representative in Eve. Instead Artillery rounds provide their own energy to the cannon, and the cannon somehow fires/accelerates the artillery shell. (As opposed to the gun drawing energy from the ship's capacitor in order to accelerate the shell.)
IMHO, the only "logical" way for Eve guns to work is that they somehow warp space in the same manner that the engines do. When a gun fires, it creates a tunnel of sub-light warped space that the shell travels along. (Eve sub-light engines warp space and the ship uses 'conventional' engines to surf the warped space or something to that effect.) So the gun warps space, and the shell travels the warp tunnel at normal ballistic speeds. Since Eve ships cannot travel very fast sub-light speeds, you could say that shell speeds are pretty low (i.e. no kinetic kill weapons are possible even if Eve ships were susceptible to kinetic attacks.) Therefore Eve gun rounds arrive on target at relatively low speeds and after riding a warp wave to their target. Therefore Eve rounds do damage by some exotic mechanism completely unrelated to real world guns. (Which is why Eve rounds are so varied.)
The sub-light warp tunnel created by the guns could also explain the short ranges in Eve (the tunnel is limited in distance.) And the need to create a warp tunnel could also explain why there are so few guns on Eve ships. Also, since Eve rounds do damage proportional to target size, it implies that Eve rounds use completely different mechanisms to cause damage, meaning that there are no HE, HEAT, or Silver Bullet rounds in Eve.
Plus Eve can mass produce Anti-Matter, which the most uber way we know of to destroy something. If you can deliver anti-matter to a target, then you really shouldn't need any other kind of damage type. However, since Eve has such varied ammunition, it means that even raw anti-matter isn't practical nor powerful enough to reliably kill Eve ships.
Again, in no way shape or form, are Eve guns anything like real world guns. Drawing any kind of parallels between the two is doomed from the start.
|
Anslo
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 18:43:00 -
[76]
Originally by: TimMc
Why so big? Because its awesome. Look at this image of all the eve ships for scale.
How the hell do we know what Talocan ships look like???
|
Kick Muck
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 23:20:00 -
[77]
Damn those Vogons, their ships "...hang in the air in much the same way that bricks don't." (sic.)
|
Vain Eldritch
|
Posted - 2009.05.18 08:31:00 -
[78]
Also, why are there no crew numbers in the ship info'...? A titan-class ship must have at least 10,000 crew surely, and a battleship sveral hundred. Even a frig' must have several crew and officers.
As I see it, in my imagination, my character is the captain on the bridge barking orders ("Hard to port! Roll 92 degrees port yaw! Fire starboard cannons!"; "Navigation! Plot us a course out of here!", etc ).
I hope one day we can see our characters on the bridge with crew milling about...
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.18 08:47:00 -
[79]
Originally by: stoicfaux
...
EVE weapons are intentionally underpowered as result of game mechanics. that is undeniable. no amount of techno-babbling is needed to justify it. EVE combat is about tactic and random one-shotting is not it.
realistically, offense ALWAYS beats defense (on the same power level). it's just the way life is. example: portable rocket launcher allowing infantry to defeat armor
besides, why do you think calling target and focusing fire works so well in EVE? because it's adaptation of RL combat philosophy. apply disabling force (combined DPS) to weak spot (single ship).
|
Vain Eldritch
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 10:49:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Vain Eldritch on 20/05/2009 10:53:09
Originally by: Jagga Spikes
personally, i think EVE ships are too big. in real life, problem with large ships is not production cost, but maintenance. this is the reason there are no more active battleships. even USA packed their big guns.
There are no more big battleships in the US navy, or any other navy for that matter, because modern warfare does not involve lobbing 16-inch shells from one ship to another - it involves submarine or air-launched guided missiles that will sink/cripple a big ship like the USS Iowa in one shot. Times have changed and battleships no longer rule the waves and have not since airpower took over. The Japanese super battleship Yamato was sunk in short order by bombers - that was the final proof that air power > sea power and the death-knell of the big battleships. In more modern times, several British ships were fatally damaged by single air-lauched missiles and the Argentinian battle cruiser General Belgrano was sunk by a British sub torpedo.
In Eve, things are different and I think your upkeep/maintenance argument holds up well. Mind you, with nano-technology repair like nano paste, I fail to see why maintenance cannot resolved with similar high-tech methods.
|
|
|
Steed Rilelore
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 11:23:00 -
[81]
I guess it's self-explanatory with most of the ships. I mean even a friggate - being 30-40m long - which is only the length of probably two lorries more than anything - isn't overkill, considering you need the heavy engine equipment for warp-engines, freezing capsules, you need somewhere to park your pod, possibly a nice room to relax and watch some TV on your journey through several light-years of space and whatnot. If anything, judging from the actual "living area" on a shuttle's model in comparison to it's wing-span, engines and whatnot, you may feel a little cramped.
|
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa
Minmatar
The Perfect Harvesting Experience
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 11:27:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Schayol Sunkeeper
this post is too long
Took you some time, but you finally got to the point.
-----------------------------------------------
Originally by: Paper
Rock's fine, nerf Scissors
|
Arthur Frayn
V.O.F.L IRON CORE
H E L I C O N
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 12:09:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Vain Eldritch
There are no more big battleships in the US navy, or any other navy for that matter, because modern warfare does not involve lobbing 16-inch shells from one ship to another - it involves submarine or air-launched guided missiles that will sink/cripple a big ship like the USS Iowa in one shot. Times have changed and battleships no longer rule the waves and have not since airpower took over. The Japanese super battleship Yamato was sunk in short order by bombers - that was the final proof that air power > sea power and the death-knell of the big battleships. In more modern times, several British ships were fatally damaged by single air-lauched missiles and the Argentinian battle cruiser General Belgrano was sunk by a British sub torpedo.
With the advent of real life railgun technology, big battleships might be making a comeback when they can lob a shell 200 miles at the fraction of the cost of a missile.
--
Eventus stultorum magister. |
Draeca
Tharri and Co.
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 20:27:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Warscythe Prime
Light drones are also 30m long
Check out how long fighters are in preview. Those pilots you can see inside sure are giants or something.
|
Irida Mershkov
Gallente
War is Bliss
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 20:54:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Draeca
Originally by: Warscythe Prime
Light drones are also 30m long
Check out how long fighters are in preview. Those pilots you can see inside sure are giants or something.
You know this is one thing that has always bugged me, these dudes must be fairly bloody massive.
|
SickSeven
The Undead Righteous Knights
|
Posted - 2009.05.24 03:06:00 -
[86]
Looking at the latest Ship scale chart, capital ships are definitely too small. There is now way even a single Typhoon battlehip fits inside of a Nid carrier.
Other than that I'm content with the ship sizes in EVE, because it's a game. Well, more importantly it's an MMO. If this were say a single player RPG/RTS I might demand a lot more realism out of it, but due to the fact that it is an MMO, I'm content with the compromises that were made regarding game mechanics and realism.
In reality Maels with full racks of 1400s would be shooting targets well out of visual range, and if any ship even a carrier was hit with a full salvo it would most likely be out of comission.
I think capitals may need to be bigger and battleship sized guns need an upsize, but other than that everything is good with me.
|
Mort Eveson
Gallente
Intaki Liberation Front
|
Posted - 2009.05.24 11:55:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Vain Eldritch
Also, why are there no crew numbers in the ship info'...? A titan-class ship must have at least 10,000 crew surely, and a battleship sveral hundred. Even a frig' must have several crew and officers.
As I see it, in my imagination, my character is the captain on the bridge barking orders ("Hard to port! Roll 92 degrees port yaw! Fire starboard cannons!"; "Navigation! Plot us a course out of here!", etc ).
I hope one day we can see our characters on the bridge with crew milling about...
But in EVE your captain isn't. He's floating inside his pod goo controlling the ship with his mind. Other than saying that you have crew CCP have never specifically said what they do, although the majority on the boards seem to see them as maintenance and to ensure your neural orders are carried out as intended (kind of acting like the cerebellum).
So if you ever do get to go inside your ship you wouldn't be piloting it at the time :-p. A captain can leave his pod, but the ship would not be functional or if it was it would be massively sub functional. The ships we fly are modified for pod pilots, so have systems specific to them and as someone said before, massivly less crew than a normal ship (e.g. the faction navys or 'rats).
"" |
Antoine Roquentin
Spaceship Lullaby
|
Posted - 2009.05.24 13:04:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Antoine Roquentin on 24/05/2009 13:07:00
I think I've found the explanation. The 'humans' in eve are actually a race of super giants.
proof
|
Andreya
Direct Intent
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 08:00:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Durzel
Whilst you can't obviously have ships that work like real ones in terms of armament (i.e. in the real World if you did manage to hit a rowing boat with a torpedo it would be obliterated, it wouldn't take less damage because it's small) you could make weapons at least feel more rewarding as you go up in ship size.
I'd like to see lasers that look like they do in those promo vids, right now battleship guns don't really look or sound that impressive.
no, because that would make me not want to enjoy my speedy little ships, because everyone would be just going bigger and bigger, taking away all strategy in the game
_________________________________________________________
Only once you've lost everything, are you free to do anything.
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Navigator ([email protected]) |
Vain Eldritch
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 09:59:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Mort Eveson
Originally by: Vain Eldritch
Also, why are there no crew numbers in the ship info'...? A titan-class ship must have at least 10,000 crew surely, and a battleship sveral hundred. Even a frig' must have several crew and officers.
As I see it, in my imagination, my character is the captain on the bridge barking orders ("Hard to port! Roll 92 degrees port yaw! Fire starboard cannons!"; "Navigation! Plot us a course out of here!", etc ).
I hope one day we can see our characters on the bridge with crew milling about...
But in EVE your captain isn't. He's floating inside his pod goo controlling the ship with his mind.
Yuk... I'm more in line with Clear Skys on this one - only with hundreds of crew members as opposed to three.
|
|
|
Nova Satar
Annihilate.
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 10:21:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Shereza
Originally by: Warscythe Prime
Light drones are also 30m long
They sure do pack up good then, seeing as they only take up five cubic meters in the drone bay.
rofl, this ^
|
Sung Mina
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 12:21:00 -
[92]
reason why everything is so big in eve with so few weapons is simple. All technology in eve is based off of vaccume tubes. it's the difference between an modern day digital reciever/amp vs. old school vacume tube analoge equivalent.
|
Sung Mina
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 12:27:00 -
[93]
Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Nico Terces
What I dont understand is how projectile size scales to range... I mean a proper artillery cannon can fire say what, 40 km distance on earth, which is in a parabolic trajectory.
Now, our eve guns fire like 50 km without advanced skills and technology... That's not very far in space, where there's almost no gravity or friction.
You're so missing the magic about artillery in Eve. RL artillery can take several seconds to hit at range. A 155 mm howitzer has a muzzle velocity of 563 m/s (or 0.563 km/s.) In fact, modern artillery can fire half a dozen rounds at different angles and have them arrive on target at the same time. The M-1 tank's gun fires at 1580 m/s for an 8km range. By comparison, artillery guns in Eve hit instantly. So at 50km, with say, a .001 second flight time, an Eve artillery shell is traveling at least 50,000 kilometers per second.
155m howitzer -> 0.563 km/s
M-1 120mm -> 1.58 km/s
Eve Artillery -> 50,000 km/s.
What is really interesting is when you compare Eve muzzle speeds to the speed of light:
Laser traveling at speed of light (300,000 km/s) can cover 300km in .001 seconds
Rokh w/ 425mm Railgun II with Spike Ammo can cover 224km in .001 sconds.
An Eve hybrid round is traveling at 75% of the speed of light. (Assuming a .001 second shell travel speed. (Some math wiz can probably calculate a reasonable flight time based on maximum ship speeds.)) If you lengthen the flight time to .01 seconds, the hybrid round is going at 7% of the speed of light, which is still impressive.
Long story short, guns and artillery in Eve are in no way based on real world guns and artillery (or physics as we understand them,) therefore drawing any kind of comparisons or making assumptions between Eve and RL tech is pointless. (Seriously, can you imagine what kind of power source/propellant would be required to get a shell up to 7% of the speed of light at the squeeze of a trigger?)
uf tgus gane were vased ib reakuty it would be a missles and lasers kinda world
|
Wacktopia
Infinity Miners Union
Eych Four Eks Zero Ahr
|
Posted - 2009.05.26 20:50:00 -
[94]
I know what you're getting at. Like...
...When a battle-ship bumps an object and spins 180 degrees in an instant and you think: 'hmm the gforce must be massive for teh people playing space-chess in the bridge'?
... When the barrel of a "220mm" gun is apparently the same size as a 2-storey window on the ship?
... When you wonder what on earth occupies all that space on a massive ship or why I cannot transport my buggy accross the map in a luxury cabin?
Ahhhh....
|
Maximus Vorlon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 08:46:00 -
[95]
This one deserves a BUMP....
I have to agree.... we do need to rescale alot og the ships in Eve. I haven't read all the posts in this thread so I don't know if it's been mentioned or not.... but what bothers me the most are some of the more obvious scaling issues.... For example the Chimera Carrier....
I'm able to fit my Golem (in assembled state) into my Chimera's (carrier) ships maintenance bay.... and they pretty much look det same in size.... okey not the same.... but allmost.... Anyway, the Golem's width is several times that of the Chimera....
Also.... the battleships of the different races compared to each other are also show a great deal of difference when it comes to size. Speaking of which.... the tier 3 amarrian battleship is aprox. the same size as the Chimera and thats just wrong.
I'm sure there are other examples aswell for the other races, but as I'm caldari i'm most familiar with the beforementioned examples.
Any thoughts?
Maximus Vorlon
Captain Of The Carrier Chimera
Former Captain Of The Dreadnought Phoenix |
ninjaholic
Gallente
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 09:12:00 -
[96]
You ever seen Transformers?
I think Optimus Prime should be rescaled before the ships in Eve should.
Megatron turns into a freaking Raging Bull ffs.
From being a 60ft high robot.
>>> SUPPORT EVE's OWN IN-GAME FIGHT RECORD TOOL! <<<
|
Maximus Vorlon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 09:15:00 -
[97]
When in fact.... he's only a pistol :) A powerful pistol true.... but still only a puny pistol (or was it a rifle?).
Maximus Vorlon
Captain Of The Carrier Chimera
Former Captain Of The Dreadnought Phoenix |
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 13:10:00 -
[98]
You know, I think that the issue is less one of sheer scale and plausibility here, and more that certain ships just don't seem tailored in their appearance to suit their supposed length. E.g. the Rokh and Armageddon battleships really look like battleships, with all the little lights and 'windows' and the surmisable superstructure, and the Hurricane also does so with its 'bridge', however certain ships, like the Thrasher and the Slasher and their derivatives, really don't appear as ships their size should plausibly look.
_________________________________________________________
|
Vellen Thoss
Gallente
Radically Awesome People Eaters
NIght's Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.08.12 21:34:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Schayol Sunkeeper
the only thing that bugs me about eve spacecraft is the lack of flak. it gets really silly when you look at post battleship size ships. a titan with decent weaponry ? noooooooo hurr durr 6 highslots only durr. okay it's a gameplay issue. because the way it would be realistic, there would be no use for sub battleship sized vessels anymore.
as for star wars ships: they are about the same size than eve ships. ISD's are about the size of eve battleships and are used in a similar way. the executor class SSD is about the same size than eve titans. fightercrafts are a lot smaller than eve drones though, but that's mainly because they need to be very VERY fast to dodge flak fire and hit weak spots on enemy ships. since we don't have any flak whatsoever in eve for above reasons, there is no need for ultra small fast ships. drones do the job good enough.
as for weapon ranges. in space there is no friction, so ballistic weapons ( everything except lasers ) should have no max range. however there are other things that need to be considered ( heavy guessing goes in here ):
a) targeting systems may have a range. space is mainly a large area of blank black space with a few yellow dots on it. it is incredibly difficult to spot anything in it. try for once on a empty spot to find a friends ship that is 100+ km away from you, with your interface off. if you can't see it, you can't hit it
b) guns may not aimed accurate enough. simply because of mechanical reasons, if you for example only can adjust the gun in half degree steps, there is a given max range in which a ship can hide between that half of degree.
c) missiles may need a self destruct button. okay missiles are guided, self propelled bombs. since they won't brake ever in space, it's maybe not a good idea to leave missed missiles floating in space, they may hit something anytime. so there maybe is a self destruct function after fuel ran out.
d) lasers may dissolve after time, hybrids may destabilize after time, as in: the projectile slowly loses it's "charge"
e) gravity effects of nearby planets / stars may affect the flight path to the point where you can't hit over a certain range ( everything beside missiles )
f) angular velocity may become too high to predict forestalling accurately enough ( aiming at where the target will be, instead of where it is )
g) recoil / vibration of kinetic weaponry ( everything beside lasers ) may become too much for stabilising systems to compensate ( seems good to me because we in fact HAVE stabilisers for hybrids and projectiles )
this post is too long
There is actually particle friction in space. Despite what people seem to believe.
|
Sebastien LaForge
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2009.08.13 02:26:00 -
[100]
I wish I could see ships better at range. It's really boring when most of the time it's just little reticles shooting other little reticles on my screen.
|
|
|
Feyona
Du'uma Fiisi Integrated Astrometrics
|
Posted - 2009.08.13 03:01:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Kazang
Your called JAME5 KIRK so im going to assume your familiar with star trek, and how big those ships are? How many guns did the Enterprize have? Only 2 forward and 2 aft if i remember correctly, but big, ****ing huge lazers. The Enterprize isn't a battleship class craft, its more of a large crusier, and is 600 odd metres long which is about the size of a small BS in EVE, a raven is around 600 metres long.
That is more the scale eve was going for, star wars uses a different scale totally, the larger ships needed lots of small guns since the smaller (one man lol) ships where so imba that they could take out entire stations with one shot so the smaller guns where needed to take out the small ships.
Eve ships are so big and realistic in the way that they are not designed with gaping weaknesses, so that small one man craft similar to a light drone EVE would barely scratch the larger craft. Consider aswell that an EVE artillery barrel can be 1400mm in bore for a ship length of 1000m, and compare that to a modern sea faring Battleships with around 600mm cannons, with the ships up to 300m long. Which would have 4-8 batteries of the large guns. The proportions seem pretty good to me based on realistic info.
As far as Star Wars, I like to think that, like in real life, combat operations have switched to carrier-based ships because you have much more range and versatility; indeed, most Star Wars capital ships house large fighter wings; so the fighters are your main weapon and like you said, the little lasers are just for point defense.
You have stuff like X-Wings for space superiority (combat ceptors and AFs fill this role in EVE), and the Y-Wings and TIE bombers for taking out other large ships (stealth bombers fill this role). Obviously in EVE weaponry evolved along a different course and we have unmanned drones for point defense and large guns for shooting at bigger ships, but as 'realistic' as people claim this to be... the only comparison we have are naval battleships, which aren't used much nor considered very useful with the advent of carriers and stuff like cruise missile carrying submarines.
It's all sci-fi though so it's obviously open to conjecture. I DO wish that frigates were smaller in scale, meaning the numbers they use to describe them. I think their in-game graphical size and all that is fine, but find it a little ludicrous to be zipping around performing tight 'fighter' maneuvers in a ship that is supposed to be the size of a 747. That's bigger than the Millenium Falcon in Star Wars, which is the biggest ship I can imagine really doing that kinda thing and even it has turrets like an EVE frigate. Maybe future building materials are ridiculously superior to our current ones so that this makes sense, I dunno. According to the in-game size indicators, frigates and manned fighters are both about that size.
It seems as if they just made some ships 'big' so that they'd seem impressive to new players. I dunno.
|
Iria Ahrens
Amarr
101st Space Marine Force
Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.08.13 03:35:00 -
[102]
Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 13/08/2009 03:39:09
Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 13/08/2009 03:36:48
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
The thing that bugs me the most, is that frigates, which are well, frigates, and are pretty big, a Rifter is about the size of a 747 if I remember correctly. Yet, they maneuver like fighters.
I think this entire thread is funny, but this one really made me lol. In Honor Harrington, a pinnance, which is essentially a parasite landing boat that fits inside a frigat and has no warp capability is described specifically as being about the size as 747.
Scale for spaceships is based on the innards of a ship. Since this technology doesn't exist for real authors have to make assumption about how "big" each essential subsystem is.
Warp Systems
Thrust Systems
Comms
Particle shielding
Inertial control.
In "Sci-fantasy" like Star Trek and especially Star Wars, where the Authors barely even pay lip service to such things, you end up with really small ships. But lots of other authors come up with even bigger ships. Babylon 5 had an explorer ship docked for a time that was bigger than the space system itself, it was described as just ONE HUGE ENGINE.
Inertial dampeners don't just let your ship accelerate faster as they do in EVE, they are there so you don't turn to a goey paste when your ship goes from zero to over 10km/sec in just a few seconds. In good sci-fi ships are eliminated not always by blowing them up, but sometimes a glancing hit will hit the inertial dampener and suddenly accelerate the occupants into the nearest wall. The ship just continues off into space. But how big are these dampeners? A lot of writers don't even consider it and "magic it up." other writers at least set aside a certain amount of ships mass for it.
Comms. We all know how big a radio is, but how about a faster than light com that can communicate anywhere in known space? In Mutiner's Moon the Ship Dahak, which was the size of the Earth's moon, in fact it was disguised as the earth's moon, said that the majority of its mass was dedicated to the Hypercom and Enchnach drive, the Enchnach drive was a type of warp drive that teleported the ship short distances.
Thrust systems - I don't know why but apparently EVE still uses rocket engines, whether solid or liquid fueled, rocket engines are big. There's no getting around it. Unless it's Sci-magic like star wars where the author again didn't put any thought at all to how big rocket powered ships would be.
Shielding, the Shields presumadely take up mass too, but how big does a shield have to be cover a specific area, and how quickly does that change? Again, many authors don't even think about it and just magic it in. But another thing making ships big is attempting to create shields that have a given number of HP and can extend to a given distance.
Don't compare EVE ship sizes to ships in Books/movies where the author didn't even consider these things, compare them to ships of author's that did. And you'll have a whole different perspective about ship sizes.
If anything, I think a lot of ships should be made bigger, especially carriers.
--
EVE is about balls, brains, and paranoia. SP comes in a distant fourth place. |
Graardor
|
Posted - 2009.08.14 11:39:00 -
[103]
I think scale is about right at the moment.
larger ships slug it out from across the battlefield, middle size ships provide support for the larger ships (cruisers, HACs, maybe bc's) while the smaller ships (frigs, intys and assault frigs) dogfight at close range in their wolfpacks.
at least if fleets always had small, medium and large ships types.....
|
ry ry
StateCorp
HUZZAH FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2009.08.14 12:29:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Graardor
I think scale is about right at the moment.
larger ships slug it out from across the battlefield, middle size ships provide support for the larger ships (cruisers, HACs, maybe bc's) while the smaller ships (frigs, intys and assault frigs) dogfight at close range in their wolfpacks.
at least if fleets always had small, medium and large ships types.....
imo the range of sizes should be larger -
frigs should be smaller, cruisers should be a bit smaller, BCs might aswell stay the same size, battleships should be a bit bigger, caps should be much bigger.
|
Duskchylde
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.15 11:45:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Maximus Vorlon
When in fact.... he's only a pistol :) A powerful pistol true.... but still only a puny pistol (or was it a rifle?).
If I remember correctly it's actually a pistol with a shoulder stock (maybe that's why you remember is as a rifle), if the "cartoon reading from the 80's" part of my brain hasn't failed me. and it could be used by humans just as easily as another robot. |
Azirapheal
Amarr
Armored Core Inc.
The Council.
|
Posted - 2009.08.15 12:03:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Tesh Sevateem
It annoys me a bit that our ships are so immensely huge. Sometimes, it looks as if the ship model was designed with a specific scale in mind. Then when the skin was applied, little tiny windows were added making the ship look, perhaps, 10 times bigger. I have a hard time imagining the sheer size of a Cruiser - let alone a Dreadnought. There really is no reason to make them so huge - better to make frigates rather small - perhaps 8-10 meters instead of the current 40. A super-duper huge ship should be no more than one kilometer in length.
Do you have any idea how much it would cost to create an advanced ship 13 kilometres long, containing facilities for thousands of crew members and electronic systems?
A car today may cost $10,000.00. How much does the steering wheel cost? How much does the exhaust pipe cost? A car is about 3 meters long. Now imagine a frigate being 15 times as big. How much does the paper bin in your captain's office cost? How much does the ceiling fan in your captain's bedroom cost? The problem is that with a cost of perhaps 30,000.00 ISK for a frigate, the price for a pack of 6 eggs in the local supermarket would be impossible to even measure in ISK "cents". A frigate which is 40 meters long would have to cost many, many millions. Otherwise, the economic system only works on a certain size object and larger.
I know it's a game, but to me, the immensely huge size of ships doesn't add anything "cool" or whatever - it just adds distance to the illusion. I'd personally love to see a reduction of the ship sizes by a factor 10. Ship models can be kept, they "just" need a new skin, and all stat values that involve the size of a ship or module reduced by a factor 10. It's still not a problem to shoot 40km with artillery.
Quote:
a Minmatar ship might have an advantage in combat because the attacker can't tell at a glance whether her wrecking shot has turned it into a floating junkpile or whether it's still fully inta |
StealthNet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 18:38:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Iria Ahrens
Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 13/08/2009 04:08:39
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
The thing that bugs me the most, is that frigates, which are well, frigates, and are pretty big, a Rifter is about the size of a 747 if I remember correctly. Yet, they maneuver like fighters.
I think this entire thread is funny, but this one really made me lol. In Honor Harrington, a penance, which is essentially a parasite landing boat that fits inside a frigate's boat bay and has no warp capability is described specifically as being about the size as 747.
Scale for spaceships is based on the innards of a ship not seagoing equivalents. Since this technology doesn't exist for real, authors have to make assumption about how "big" each essential subsystem is.
Warp Systems
Thrust Systems
Comms
Particle shielding
Inertial control.
Antigravity.
In "Sci-fantasy" like Star Trek and especially Star Wars, where the Authors barely even pay lip service to such things, you end up with really small ships. But lots of other authors come up with even bigger ships. Babylon 5 had an explorer ship docked for a time that was bigger than the space system itself, it was described as just ONE HUGE ENGINE.
Inertial dampeners don't just let your ship accelerate faster as they do in EVE, they are there so you don't turn to a goey paste when your ship goes from zero to over 10km/sec in just a few seconds. In good sci-fi ships are eliminated not always by blowing them up, but sometimes a glancing hit will hit the inertial dampener and suddenly accelerate the occupants into the nearest wall. The ship just continues off into space. But how big are these dampeners? A lot of writers don't even consider it and "magic it up." other writers at least set aside a certain amount of ships mass for it.
Comms. We all know how big a radio is, but how about a faster than light com that can communicate anywhere in known space? In Mutiner's Moon the Ship Dahak, which was the size of the Earth's moon, in fact it was disguised as the earth's moon, said that the majority of its mass was dedicated to the Hypercom and Enchnach drive, the Enchnach drive was a type of warp drive that teleported the ship short distances.
Thrust systems - I don't know why but apparently EVE still uses rocket engines, whether solid or liquid fueled, rocket engines are big. There's no getting around it. Unless it's Sci-magic like star wars where the author again didn't put any thought at all to how big rocket powered ships would be. Star Trek at least uses "impulse" engines not rockets, so they can be forgiven for not having monstrous engines, but the engines still take up about 1/4-1/3 the mass of some ships. But when known technology is used in sci-fi, then we can make educated guesses about size, and any engine that propels itself by ejecting mass is going to be HUGE. If an author decides to invent a new technology, like impulse engines, then the size of the engine is entirely up to that writer.
Shielding, the Shields presumadely take up mass too, but how big does a shield have to be cover a specific area, and how quickly does that change? Again, many authors don't even think about it and just magic it in. But another thing making ships big is attempting to create shields that have a given number of HP and can extend to a given distance.
Antigravity: how big does an anti-gravity engine have to be and how does it scale with ship size? Something again, lots of author's will barely pay lip service to, Star Trek has "anti-grav" plating that is essentially the size of floor tiles. How convenient, Not so in other books.
Don't compare EVE ship sizes to ships in Books/movies where the author didn't even consider these things, compare them to ships of author's that did. And you'll have a whole different perspective about ship sizes.
If anything, I think a lot of ships should be made bigger, especially carriers.
This.
StealthNet
_______________________________________________
|
Red Thunder
tr0pa de elite
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 18:46:00 -
[108]
you, my good sir, need to get a life :)
Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines |
Deathbarrage
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 21:53:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Deathbarrage on 21/09/2009 21:55:47
Let's try not to forget this is in fact a game, i mean the whole ''frigate as small mass fighters sent out by bigger ships like in star wars'' would only work if one player would be able to control 10-20 frigate-sized ships at the same time, otherwise the players:damage ratio would be way off.
Also, as to realism, let's forget about that all together since a space shuttle is moving at almost 7.8km/s anyway and the average eve-ship though way more advanced doesnt quite cut that
(And yes i know a space shuttle is in orbit when moving at that speed and yet so are the eve stations and ships dont warp into an orbit so basically you should catch up with the station first before you're able to dock)
Edit: to that stealthnet dude above, you have no clue how big any of these supposedly present ''parts'' of a ship are supposed to be since they don't quite exist nor does anyone have a friggin idea how to build one so any arguement on how ''it's supposed to be big'' is kinda bullocks tbh
|
Xiozor
Anonymous Alcoholics
Wrath.
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 22:49:00 -
[110]
This is the size of a 800mm artillery piece
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/80_cm_Gustav_shell_compared_to_T-34.jpg
A 1400 would nearly double this size.
-----------------------------------------------
Mr.Kippling just launched a nuclear holocaust at third world countries! ... But he does make exceedingly good cakes. |
|
|
Kyra Felann
Gallente
Noctis Fleet Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 22:57:00 -
[111]
Edited by: Kyra Felann on 21/09/2009 23:03:57
Originally by: Tuncan
You have a crew for all ships. Shuttles are the only ships that are used by 1 pilot.
It has been stated by devs that most pod-controlled frigates do not have a crew.
In response to the OP, the only issue I have with size is that capital ships should be bigger. Some of them don't look big enough to hold ships that they can hold.
I remember when I first started playing Eve, my first corp's CEO emphasized to me that capital ships were BIG, but when I actually saw them in person the first time, they weren't as awe-inspiringly big as I'd imagined. I was kind of disappointed, since I'd expected them to dwarf even the biggest battleship.
For example, the Hyperion is not much shorter than a carrier, yet carriers can't use gates and require a whole different way of building than a battleship does? I think the smallest capital should be about twice as big as the biggest sub-capital. They're supposed to be in a whole other class, but they don't look much bigger than some battleships.
|
Kaylee Juuna
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 00:12:00 -
[112]
Originally by: quave
sense of scale Rohk vs car close up
sense of scale Rohk vs car zoom out
sense of scale spot the gman
Made in gmod, Someone else extracted the models from eve. I had to use the biggest map available, even so when i tried this with a hyperion the game broke .
If that's what it looked and felt like in-game while in a frigate, this game would be completely awe-inspiring.
CCP, make small ships smaller and big ships bigger or change the camera so that huge ships actually look huge. Really, that is the best change you could make to this game.
|
Kagan Kashgar
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 03:22:00 -
[113]
Relativistic zipzapping thru systems at near-light speeds with warp missiles traveling at many times C, lazer beams seeming sluggish while struggling to reach the shields or hulls of ships and full saturation of passed space with monocarboncomposite materials also accelerated to fractions of 300000km/s
Negative inertia for tachyonic transmission of energy streams to annihilate matter in beautiful cataclysmic supernovae of faster than light expansion of exotic energy!
Planets broken down to raw materials to manufacture machines that should implode under own mass, leaving a peaceful and quiet galaxy.
uh, wut?
bigger is better, yes
|
Chade Malloy
Anarchy Unleashed
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 13:27:00 -
[114]
the planets are not moving!
nuff said.
Originally by: Oveur
Jesus Christ. The Freighter ate the Stargate god and the Dreadnought didn't!
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:08:00 -
[115]
Originally by: JAME5 KIRK
After briefly perusing several genre specific encyclopedia's and then using eve's new view item tool, one thing stands out to me.
EVE's ships are huge compared to other genre's and have relatively little weaponry (i know this makes for easier gameplay).
The orca for example is the size of a star destroyer (victory class original movie), yet these ship are relatively easy to build.
Even a shuttle is 40m long thats the size of 3 articulated lorries (nearly).
Does anyone think a rescaling of ships may be in order to make small ships small and the bigger ships bigger etc.
input appreciated.
No.
These ships needs to fit jump dirves, life support, capulse hosting, self sustainability systems, energy systems, impulse drives, FTL scan systems.
All this in one shuttle with the current size is rather impressive.
Seems pretty reasoanble to me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 01:38:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Emma Peil
I'm not sure...I think The Culture likely has bigger ships than Eve. It is a post-scarcity society so resources is not an issue.
Yes. Culture GSVs are generally many tens of kilometers in the longest dimension, and sort of shaped like the monolith from 2001, so there's a huge amount of cubic kilometres there. Those mainly used for population have hundreds of millions of inhabitants.
--
Salpad
C.E.O., Carebears with Attitude |
Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 02:04:00 -
[117]
Originally by: SFX Bladerunner
That has to be the most awesome thing I have EVAR seen.
I want a 2 meters high poster of that
CCP should print posters like that, and sell them.
--
Salpad
C.E.O., Carebears with Attitude |
Flex Nebura
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 03:23:00 -
[118]
Originally by: TimMc
Why so big? Because its awesome. Look at this image of all the eve ships for scale.
hmm made me think Iceland should make one last print of their money with that as the template.. before they switch to euros
|
Lolion Reglo
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 07:25:00 -
[119]
the way i look at the ships is this. the average human is 6 feet tall, which general equates to about 2 meters. so if you want to figure the length of ships stack humans one on top of the other till you reach the number. then think of how much space they should take up in terms of the ship and all the equipment inside of it. A frigate as much as the pod can operate it all can run about 4 people for a crew. Cruisers closer to 16 or more. battlecruisers were talking 30 to 50. Batleships 75 to 150 depending on size and god i dont even want to think about capitals...lol. My point is the ships are huge because the technology that runs them ARE HUGE!.... how small do you think a warp drive is?... and a plasma core that powers the ship aint no hand held device either. think that alot of the sapce is taken up by equipment and not open space and you get a greater appreciation for why theyre that big.
good example is serenity from firefly... i would either call that a frigate or maybe a small cruiser...lol. if you people need some sort of example for scale...lol.
|
MightyRhinox
Minmatar
Rhinox Heavy Industries
Twilight Military Industrial Complex Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 08:08:00 -
[120]
Well let's look at some real life ships for comparison. Many people seem to make the mistake of thinking of spaceships in terms of aircraft, but they're not are they ;)
HMS Somerset (F82), frigate: 133m
USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG-81), destroyer: 155m
USS Port Royal (CG-73), cruiser: 173m
HMS Hood (52), battlecruiser (it should be noted this is a defunct class now though): 262m
USS Iowa (BB-61), Battleship: 270m
Nimitz class carrier: 332m
Now given that Eve is in space, some of the ships are undersized if anything (frigates for instance)
|
|
|
BombStrike
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 08:12:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Iria Ahrens
Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 13/08/2009 04:08:39
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
The thing that bugs me the most, is that frigates, which are well, frigates, and are pretty big, a Rifter is about the size of a 747 if I remember correctly. Yet, they maneuver like fighters.
I think this entire thread is funny, but this one really made me lol. In Honor Harrington, a penance, which is essentially a parasite landing boat that fits inside a frigate's boat bay and has no warp capability is described specifically as being about the size as 747.
Scale for spaceships is based on the innards of a ship not seagoing equivalents. Since this technology doesn't exist for real, authors have to make assumption about how "big" each essential subsystem is.
Warp Systems
Thrust Systems
Comms
Particle shielding
Inertial control.
Antigravity.
In "Sci-fantasy" like Star Trek and especially Star Wars, where the Authors barely even pay lip service to such things, you end up with really small ships. But lots of other authors come up with even bigger ships. Babylon 5 had an explorer ship docked for a time that was bigger than the space system itself, it was described as just ONE HUGE ENGINE.
...
Shielding, the Shields presumadely take up mass too, but how big does a shield have to be cover a specific area, and how quickly does that change? Again, many authors don't even think about it and just magic it in. But another thing making ships big is attempting to create shields that have a given number of HP and can extend to a given distance.
Antigravity: how big does an anti-gravity engine have to be and how does it scale with ship size? Something again, lots of author's will barely pay lip service to, Star Trek has "anti-grav" plating that is essentially the size of floor tiles. How convenient, Not so in other books.
Don't compare EVE ship sizes to ships in Books/movies where the author didn't even consider these things, compare them to ships of author's that did. And you'll have a whole different perspective about ship sizes.
If anything, I think a lot of ships should be made bigger, especially carriers.
While I agree with you on many points - if we continue in this way, ships should be a lot larger and complex, thus things like battleships, carriers, dreadnoughts and maybe even cruisers should cost an insanely huge amount of money, making them out of reach for the young pilot killing a bunch of pirates or mining rocks and only the major faction armies would be using them. Cruisers could maybe bought by a bunch of players working for weeks to make the money, and they'd have to operate it all together to get something out of it.
No seriously, EVE, while aiming for a realistic world, shouldn't push it too far, most ships are ok by their size while I agree that carriers which should be made bigger ( they have insane cargos, can transport unpackaged ships ) to reflect their current capabilities.
|
Sa'Shena
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 08:46:00 -
[122]
|
Kail Storm
Caldari
The Unforgiving.
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 17:52:00 -
[123]
To the guy that said "real sci-fi" novelists had figured out that ships would be the size of moons and that comms arrays thru subspace would be ginormous have to remember mos tthose storys etc were thought up in the 70`s when relays in a chip were the size of dimes and we used all manual switches etc
This is a nano age and in the nano age everything will be 1 millionth the size of the 60`s novelists, in fact Nano`s in theory work like little tiny army ants and we surmise that coms through space will be tiny [10 millionth the size of a cell] with a antenna array will stretch out to there furthest distance and manually play a game of telephone.
Also they will repair holes etc by funnelig out and creating bridges to plug holes rather than having to cordan of areas of the ship etc like ships of old. Basically if you imagine an 8 legged super ai nano bot and imagine trillions of them and a ability to make raw material into more new nanos the possibilites arent just endless but enevitably smaller.
Think about a capsuleer who is connected via nueral control to 25 trillion nanobots that can form bridges or communicate and rapid speeds or even be used as weapons to attack other ships...This is the real future so ships in eve can be way smaller and still true to real sci fi. In fact our nano stuff now impress`s
Shields theoretically could be million of nanos all griping onto there neighbors 8 other legs and creating a super strong shield of super dense hard and translucent layer. Imagine the matrix squid machines and all they could do when they were in force x that by trillions and that is what could happen.
If you run, You`ll only die tired :) |
Kaylee Juuna
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:12:00 -
[124]
Edited by: Kaylee Juuna on 23/09/2009 22:13:28
Does anyone have any more size comparison pictures?
|
Crewman Jenkins
Caldari
Malicious Demi-Lancers
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:42:00 -
[125]
I have always wished that the animations for the weapons would look like an entire array of weapons were firing. One turret would still be one turret, but it would look like 5 were firing.
|
Dessie Enta
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 03:54:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Tesh Sevateem
There really is no reason to make them so huge - better to make frigates rather small - perhaps 8-10 meters instead of the current 40.
But Frigates aren't small ships...
For example lets look at some real world frigates.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/hydra/images/hydra_frigate1.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/Chilean_frigate,_US_cruiser_and_Peruvian_frigate_050711-N-4374S-005.jpg
http://sciencedude.freedomblogging.com/files/2008/08/frigate-copy.jpg
They don't look like they're 8-10m long
|
Kail Storm
Caldari
The Unforgiving.
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 04:58:00 -
[127]
Well since our frigs are really fighters, fast nimble interceptors they arent what we consider frigates...otherwise we need to be able to pilot fighters out of mom`s etc and still the fighters in ga,me are massive way to big.
So yeah frigs are light fast ships that intercept other craft but since we are half navy half airforce we need fighters .
If you run, You`ll only die tired :) |
Vixisti
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:44:00 -
[128]
This entire thread is ridiculous. Check out some book art from early Assimov novels if you want to see even bigger space ships!
The artists in Eve are second to none in the sci-fi genre and if they want to portray ships as being km long in some cases that's fine with me
|
Drakarin
Gallente
The Abyssmal Spire
Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2009.12.05 01:37:00 -
[129]
I love that ships are big, I just dislike how it's nearly impossible to immerse yourself in this size. I'm very happy with the new Field of view, which helps somewhat with the scale.
What they need to do next is drastically increase the size of all weaponry ( the weapon models on the ships, as well as the actual effect).
|
Dacryphile
|
Posted - 2009.12.05 02:16:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Drakarin
I love that ships are big, I just dislike how it's nearly impossible to immerse yourself in this size. I'm very happy with the new Field of view, which helps somewhat with the scale.
What they need to do next is drastically increase the size of all weaponry ( the weapon models on the ships, as well as the actual effect).
I dislike necro threads.
Originally by: Doc Robertson
...take a good look at this pic and tell us which one is you.
|
|
|
Drakarin
Gallente
The Abyssmal Spire
Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2009.12.05 02:20:00 -
[131]
Edited by: Drakarin on 05/12/2009 02:22:07
Originally by: Lisento Slaven
Originally by: Jagga Spikes
actually, EVE weapons are underpowered. modern (20-th century) weapons philosophy is "one shot-one kill". basically, it takes one solid hit to disable a target of equal size. but, that would be no fun, would it?
They're not underpowered...defensive systems in EVE are overpowered. Even structure in EVE is more powerful then any armor plating in the "real world".
Shielding is appropriately powerful.
Armor is, perhaps, TOO powerful. Though given the advanced state of our societies and factions and the new materials we have access to, it's not so unreasonable. But hell, I don't think there's any kind of material that can survive an impact from a 50 megaton equivalent nuclear bomb (which torpedo's are AT LEAST as powerful as).
Structure, I've always thought, should be only a few hundred hit points even on the largest of ships. It's structure. No resistances, just your basic weak hull.
 Originally by: Dacryphile
Originally by: Drakarin
I love that ships are big, I just dislike how it's nearly impossible to immerse yourself in this size. I'm very happy with the new Field of view, which helps somewhat with the scale.
What they need to do next is drastically increase the size of all weaponry ( the weapon models on the ships, as well as the actual effect).
I dislike necro threads.
Better than creating the same thread again. I was just searching Google for EvE real life ship sizes, and I came across this. 
|
Saxton Hale
|
Posted - 2009.12.05 02:46:00 -
[132]
Edited by: Saxton Hale on 05/12/2009 02:46:32
This site needs to add the EVE ships. It's fail enough to include Halo's Halo and the alien ship from Crysis, so they should be on there.
|
Drakarin
Gallente
The Abyssmal Spire
Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2009.12.05 03:16:00 -
[133]
I also agree that fighters should replace frigates as the fast/agile ships. Frigates are way too big.
This, or all Battleship class ships and up should be scaled up in size. Especially capital ships, as stated many times they're simply far too small (besides perhaps titans) to be able to transport other ships inside them.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |