EVE Search - [PROPOSAL, CLARIFICATION] Line-of-sight ; turrets and missiles.

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[PROPOSAL, CLARIFICATION] Line-of-sight ; turrets and missiles.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.06.13 11:38:00 - [1] Early in the days of EVE, missiles would hit any object (object being stations, stargets, ships, pods, etc.) in the "linfe-of-fire" of target. In the early days this scenario shows how missiles would simply hit the object inbetween. Raven ->>> Object ->>> Target. Some time afterwards, missiles would avoid objects inbetween. ................^>>>>>v Raven ->>> Object ->>> Target. Today missiles go straight through any object inbetween. Raven ->>> O>b>j>e>c>t ->>> Target. I want to know why this change happend and what means it was justified with. Aswell as an explaination why this system can not be implented again to missiles aswell as turrets to fight off the ever increasing blob. This is just an idea and a request for a clarification of the issue. I am well aware of the concerns out there e.g. empire space neutrals in the way. This thread is not for that, this thread is for the initial and basic idea to start it all! If you agree that such system is good if implented correctly you should give support. If you do not believe that such system has a place in EVE, even with the correct balancing is done than you should not vote. I believe this would totally change EVE and create a whole new experience where game skills is much more required over a calculation spreadsheet. NOTE TO PEOPLE WITHOUT READING CAPABILITY: THIS THREAD IS ONLY FOR THE BASIC AND INITIAL IDEA, NOT FOR THE BALANCING BEHIND IT! Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.13 14:21:00 - [2] This is a can of worms... the same question can be asked of someone crossing the path of my 8 1400mm Carbine Howitzers fireing off (freight train sized <laughs>) bullets that go straight through a corp mate and nail a frigate at 80km.... Don't go there man... you'll get flamed to hell and back. :) ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= Dependable, Honorable, Intelligent, No-nonsense Vote Herschel Yamamoto for CSM!
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.06.13 14:32:00 - [3] Yes true line of sight/ray tracing would renovate combat in this game. For one thing we would actually have a truly tactical environment. Maybe in 2020 when EVE Congruent Parallel Universe edition is released CCP will have a client and servers capable of supporting it.
Herschel Yamamoto Agent-Orange	Posted - 2009.06.13 16:34:00 - [4] Too server intensive, too wrecking of current tactics, and not enough payoff. Interesting to consider, but not a good idea.
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.06.13 16:44:00 - [5] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Too server intensive, too wrecking of current tactics, and not enough payoff. Interesting to consider, but not a good idea. Of your arguments, I find that number two really doesn't hold any water. Every patch CCP releases (or at least so it seems) invalidates some tactic or another. Good players adapt, bad ones adapt after they've been podded a time or two. That aside, I agree with your other two points. The problems it would cause in terms of lag (especially in large battles when you would need to check the position of every ship against every piece of ordinance) would be unfathomable. --Vel Experience is what you get right after you need it.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.13 17:14:00 - [6] Would be a logistical nightmare.... Corpie A and B decide to test out there ships Corpie A sits off at 80 KM with jump gate between him and B A fires off a round of his cannons... @ B C jumps in and gets nailed with 2000 DPS and loses his shuttle... :)
Re'taka Minmatar Republic University	Posted - 2009.06.13 17:29:00 - [7] Originally by: Drake Draconis Would be a logistical nightmare.... Corpie A and B decide to test out there ships Corpie A sits off at 80 KM with jump gate between him and B A fires off a round of his cannons... @ B C jumps in and gets nailed with 2000 DPS and loses his shuttle... A gets concorded because s/he was in highsec :) edited for lulz
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.13 17:48:00 - [8] Which leads to rampant rage and complaints saying they where unjustly concorded and all that crap. So yeah... bad idea. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= Dependable, Honorable, Intelligent, No-nonsense Vote Herschel Yamamoto for CSM!
Herschel Yamamoto Agent-Orange	Posted - 2009.06.13 18:04:00 - [9] Originally by: De'Veldrin Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Too server intensive, too wrecking of current tactics, and not enough payoff. Interesting to consider, but not a good idea. Of your arguments, I find that number two really doesn't hold any water. Every patch CCP releases (or at least so it seems) invalidates some tactic or another. Good players adapt, bad ones adapt after they've been podded a time or two. It's a minor point, of course(the lag is the big one), but I'll address it anyways. Basically, PvP in Eve is complex, and there's a lot of things you have to keep track of. Generally, I dislike adding more to that - this is why I oppose joystick control, for example. Needing to spread your fleet out wider in order to avoid friendly fire is an intense annoyance in a game that isn't a flight sim and doesn't want to be, and the sheer volume of random Concordokens that this would produce is also a massively bad thing.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.13 18:20:00 - [10] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Originally by: De'Veldrin Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Too server intensive, too wrecking of current tactics, and not enough payoff. Interesting to consider, but not a good idea. Of your arguments, I find that number two really doesn't hold any water. Every patch CCP releases (or at least so it seems) invalidates some tactic or another. Good players adapt, bad ones adapt after they've been podded a time or two. It's a minor point, of course(the lag is the big one), but I'll address it anyways. Basically, PvP in Eve is complex, and there's a lot of things you have to keep track of. Generally, I dislike adding more to that - this is why I oppose joystick control, for example. Needing to spread your fleet out wider in order to avoid friendly fire is an intense annoyance in a game that isn't a flight sim and doesn't want to be, and the sheer volume of random Concordokens that this would produce is also a massively bad thing. Cant help but say that it would be utterly hilarious.... right up to the point where i get taken out by cross fire.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.06.13 19:09:00 - [11] Quote: This is a can of worms... the same question can be asked of someone crossing the path of my 8 1400mm Carbine Howitzers fireing off (freight train sized <laughs>) bullets that go straight through a corp mate and nail a frigate at 80km.... Don't go there man... you'll get flamed to hell and back. Did you read it? This post is about the idea, not on how it would be balanced. Of course such thing you speak of would not happen. Quote: Yes true line of sight/ray tracing would renovate combat in this game. For one thing we would actually have a truly tactical environment. Maybe in 2020 when EVE Congruent Parallel Universe edition is released CCP will have a client and servers capable of supporting it. Again, how do you know that this is server intensive? How do you know that the servers would not hold it? What do you base your response from? Quote: Too server intensive, too wrecking of current tactics, and not enough payoff. Interesting to consider, but not a good idea. How do you know that? It has already been in the game! Quote: That aside, I agree with your other two points. The problems it would cause in terms of lag (especially in large battles when you would need to check the position of every ship against every piece of ordinance) would be unfathomable. --Vel Again, how do you know how this will effect server performance? Who are you to judge? As I said before, this has already been in the game before! Quote: Would be a logistical nightmare.... Corpie A and B decide to test out there ships Corpie A sits off at 80 KM with jump gate between him and B A fires off a round of his cannons... @ B C jumps in and gets nailed with 2000 DPS and loses his shuttle... Yes and no. The post is about the idea and not about all the issues behind it. The issues would of course be worked over, so do not try to create a problem out of nothing. Quote: It's a minor point, of course(the lag is the big one), but I'll address it anyways. Basically, PvP in Eve is complex, and there's a lot of things you have to keep track of. Generally, I dislike adding more to that - this is why I oppose joystick control, for example. Needing to spread your fleet out wider in order to avoid friendly fire is an intense annoyance in a game that isn't a flight sim and doesn't want to be, and the sheer volume of random Concordokens that this would produce is also a massively bad thing. How is it a bad thing to make EVE more immerse? What don't you get about the idea rather than focusing on the problems? If this idea could be implented (LIKE IT WAS BEFORE FOR MISSILES) without CONCORDDOKKEN and "unfriendly fire" just loss of damage, would it be bad? I am not here to try and balance the idea. This is just to get a response why CCP took it out of the game in the first place and why the idea has not been implented again because frankly, it is a good idea no matter how dangerous it would be. If I know CCP correctly, it would not really have any impact on empire space anyway. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.13 19:44:00 - [12] Yes it is a good idea, yes it should be added, no not now, too server intensive. Quote: Again, how do you know that this is server intensive? How do you know that the servers would not hold it? What do you base your response from? Common knowledge? And missiles is one thing, they are just objects like ships, and at every iteration it can check if the missile is inside something. But now you also need to add for every shot fired a check if it has a clear line of fire, and what it will hit.
Sir Muffoon Backdoor Enterprises	Posted - 2009.06.13 19:52:00 - [13] If line of sight was reintroduced I would make it my mission to infiltrate highsec missions and get in the way of their guns so they get concordokken'd. Fun times ahead of this.
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.06.14 01:30:00 - [14] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock A binch of stuff that all comes down to how do you know... I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not a computer programmer. If you were, you probably wouldn't be suggesting this. Here's the short and dirty version. When you place an object on the grid, the server has to keep track of it - where it is, where it's going, how quickly it's moving, etc. This gets more complex when that object is a ship, because now the server also has to keep track of player input - did you change direction, speed, module status? Currently, when a weapon gets fired, the server really only needs to know three things: A) What did you shoot at? B) When will the ammunition reach the target? C) Did the ammunition hit the target? All three of these things can be determined when the shot is fired - what you see on the screen is just the visual representation of the intersection of those three answers (we're ignoring the fourth question, how much damage did it do). The point being, the server can do all of this very rapidly, because it only has to do it one time for each shot. To do what you are asking to do would require knowing the projectiles EXACT flight path through the grid, the EXACT time it will be at each point along the grid, and EXACTLY where every other object on the grid will be at each of those times (to check for hits on unintended targets). This information would have to be recalculated every time a player on that grid does something that affects the speed or direction of their ship. Indeed, it would have to be updated nearly constantly if you have a ship orbiting something else, since the direction of that ship would be changing constantly. And that's just for ONE SHOT. I dun know about you, but my hurricane has six cannon on it, and I rarely fire just one of them. Now multiply that by the number of ships on the grid, and I hope you are beginning to get the point. Frankly, I like the idea behind what you're trying to do - collateral damage is an interesting aspect to a war - but unless CCP invests in a couple (dozen) supercomputers I don't think it's going to happen. --Vel Experience is what you get right after you need it.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.14 04:36:00 - [15] Admiral did you read what we said or are you just trolling our responses?
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.06.14 09:49:00 - [16] Quote: And missiles is one thing, they are just objects like ships, and at every iteration it can check if the missile is inside something. But now you also need to add for every shot fired a check if it has a clear line of fire, and what it will hit. That is true I guess. But does that mean that if there is a missile only fleet that the servers will lag a lot more due to missiles being objects? What kind of problem would it be to deal turrets as objects but with instant flight time? Quote: If line of sight was reintroduced I would make it my mission to infiltrate highsec missions and get in the way of their guns so they get concordokken'd. Of course this would not be the case as damage would just negated instead of applied on empire target. Quote: I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not a computer programmer. If you were, you probably wouldn't be suggesting this. Are you a programmer thou? Quote: Currently, when a weapon gets fired, the server really only needs to know three things: A) What did you shoot at? B) When will the ammunition reach the target? C) Did the ammunition hit the target? D) Weapon used E) Velocity, transversal velocity. F) Signature radius G) Tracking H) Signature resolution I) Shield, armor, hull resistance etc. etc. The server already knows where the location of objects are in space. Just take smartbombs and ECM burst and ramming other ships for example. Quote: To do what you are asking to do would require knowing the projectiles EXACT flight path through the grid, the EXACT time it will be at each point along the grid, and EXACTLY where every other object on the grid will be at each of those times (to check for hits on unintended targets). This information would have to be recalculated every time a player on that grid does something that affects the speed or direction of their ship. Indeed, it would have to be updated nearly constantly if you have a ship orbiting something else, since the direction of that ship would be changing constantly. I believe the server knows this information already. Quote: Frankly, I like the idea behind what you're trying to do - collateral damage is an interesting aspect to a war - but unless CCP invests in a couple (dozen) supercomputers I don't think it's going to happen. If you like the idea why do you not support it? It's not like CCP will implent it if it does not work? I just want a clarification on the issue given that it was implented on missiles before. Quote: Admiral did you read what we said or are you just trolling our responses? Not at all. I am trying to get good responses with thought behind instead of "No it won't work because I say so" comments. I want clarification of this from CCP given that they have had this system on missiles before. What was the reason for removal? Was it due to balance etc.? Is it possible to be added again? Can turrets be treated as instant hitting objects since objects hitting eachother is already in the system? Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Oam Mkoll Caldari The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.14 12:05:00 - [17] There's so much unrealistic stuff in this game and you're worried about projectile collisions? :) Not an issue as far as I see it. ---
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.06.14 13:44:00 - [18] Edited by: De''Veldrin on 14/06/2009 13:50:57 Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Quote: I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not a computer programmer. If you were, you probably wouldn't be suggesting this. Are you a programmer thou? Actually, yes. Otherwise, I wouldn't have said that. Quote: Quote: Currently, when a weapon gets fired, the server really only needs to know three things: A) What did you shoot at? B) When will the ammunition reach the target? C) Did the ammunition hit the target? D) Weapon used E) Velocity, transversal velocity. F) Signature radius G) Tracking H) Signature resolution I) Shield, armor, hull resistance etc. etc. Most of the stuff you just listed only gets used once, in the calculation for hit/damage resolution. The server keeps track of it, yes, but it doesn't have to up date it unless there's player/AI input. and that's the key - there is a defined time when that information gets updated. Unless and until that event happens, the server already has the values it needs and doesn't need to recalculate them. Weapon used is a perfect example of that - the server already knows what weapons you have, all it really has to do is note which one you fired, and it can do that one time, when you click the module the first time. Until you provide more input, it isn't going to bother checking it again. And H and I don't even apply to the discussion, since they are used AFTER the determination of a hit or miss is made. Quote: The server already knows where the location of objects are in space. Just take smartbombs and ECM burst and ramming other ships for example. I never said it didn't know where the ships were. Ships, however, are not ammunition and that's what we're talking about. Quote: Quote: To do what you are asking to do would require knowing the projectiles EXACT flight path through the grid, the EXACT time it will be at each point along the grid, and EXACTLY where every other object on the grid will be at each of those times (to check for hits on unintended targets). This information would have to be recalculated every time a player on that grid does something that affects the speed or direction of their ship. Indeed, it would have to be updated nearly constantly if you have a ship orbiting something else, since the direction of that ship would be changing constantly. I believe the server knows this information already. Having it and having to recalculate it on a constant basis are very different things. One is a simple call to memory (or at worst, the database). The other requires the useage of CPU, which is how server utilization is measured. Quote: Quote: Frankly, I like the idea behind what you're trying to do - collateral damage is an interesting aspect to a war - but unless CCP invests in a couple (dozen) supercomputers I don't think it's going to happen. If you like the idea why do you not support it? Because I don't support ideas that I feel will break the game, regardless of whether I agree with the concept behind them or not. Like ships versus ammunition, agreeing with your idea and supporting a change to the game are two very different things. --Vel Experience is what you get right after you need it.
Wai Ng'Tse	Posted - 2009.06.15 12:24:00 - [19] whine whine ****ing whine!!! All I read in this thread. I say, if it works out this would be awesome. Imagine having to think about where you pvp or are on the grid because a small gas cloud around the gate will reduce the amount of damage your railguns do to the ship on the opposite side. Or if this would apply to E-War, then what about a piece of debris, it could block off the warp disruptor's effect. You find a ship in an asteroid belt, you try to jam him but the field is too dense and the jammers are more prone to failing. I vote yes, if this is implemented correctly.
shi'ako	Posted - 2009.06.15 13:21:00 - [20] Edited by: shi''ako on 15/06/2009 13:21:24 Where I would really love more real physics in the game, i doubt that CCP or the servers are capable of this atm. But as a game change, it would be an amazing addition! To see people having to fly their ships not just sit in a blob and hit F1 over and over. I'll support it, but for when itÆs more practical not now.
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:26:00 - [21] Edited by: De''Veldrin on 18/06/2009 14:25:55 Originally by: Wai Ng'Tse I vote yes, if this is implemented correctly. Take a good long look at Faction War, the corporation management UI, and POS operations, and then tell me what you think the chances of that happening are.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:30:00 - [22] Look OP... if you had the an opprotunity to turn on your brain this is a good time to do it. This requires a total rewrite and restructureing of mechanics of the game... this changes so many things that it's just completely out there. Anyone with a little bit of background in programming knows this. Compounded by the fact your dealing with an unknown number of ships... that could be "on grid" without warning... and anything else that could come up.... asteroids... stations.. objects...etc. You are simply not thinking this through... your so blinded by the brilliance of your own rear end that you cant see straight. This will simply not happen... CCP would sooner scrap the sov. system in 0.0 and rewrite that then do tihs.... and they plan to work on that as it is!
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:23:00 - [23] Originally by: De'Veldrin Edited by: De''Veldrin on 18/06/2009 14:25:55 Originally by: Wai Ng'Tse I vote yes, if this is implemented correctly. Take a good long look at Faction War, the corporation management UI, and POS operations, and then tell me what you think the chances of that happening are. By past experience CCP should not change anything nor bother to release patches/expansions due to how poorly they made previous things, amirite? Quote: This requires a total rewrite and restructureing of mechanics of the game... this changes so many things that it's just completely out there. You do not know that do you? Quote: You are simply not thinking this through... your so blinded by the brilliance of your own rear end that you cant see straight. You're an ignorant little fool. Stop posting **** please. I do not really see how the game mechanism that allows LINE-OF-SIGHT that were used on missiles could not be used on e.g. projectiles. Simply quick way would be to alter projectiles with missile launcher code but with projectile animation, then have the altered projectile act as a missile, but with instant hits; 50,000 m/s. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Fille Balle Dissolution Of Eternity Event Horizon.	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:49:00 - [24] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Stop posting **** please. Yes. I totally agree. This would fix so many problems with this game. More seriously though, I think this proposal would make life a lot more interesting, allow for more tactical situations, give miners some more tactical options for escape. /Supported
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:05:00 - [25] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Originally by: De'Veldrin Edited by: De''Veldrin on 18/06/2009 14:25:55 Originally by: Wai Ng'Tse I vote yes, if this is implemented correctly. Take a good long look at Faction War, the corporation management UI, and POS operations, and then tell me what you think the chances of that happening are. By past experience CCP should not change anything nor bother to release patches/expansions due to how poorly they made previous things, amirite? Stop being deliberately ignorant. I'm not saying CCP shouldn't release patches, and you bloody well know it. I'm saying that making significant changes that have the potential to completely kill the game is not the course of wisdom. If you're going to continue to purposefully not understand what the armguments presented against this are, I can only conclude that, at this point, you're trolling to see if you can drum up more support and further attempts at discussion would be futile.
Syringe Oedipus Complex	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:22:00 - [26] Originally by: Drake Draconis Would be a logistical nightmare.... Corpie A and B decide to test out there ships Corpie A sits off at 80 KM with jump gate between him and B A fires off a round of his cannons... @ B C jumps in and gets nailed with 2000 DPS and loses his shuttle... :) Sounds like it'd be interesting and educational to me :). Would certainly put a new context on suicide ganking. Suicide reverse-gank?
Maxsim Goratiev Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate	Posted - 2009.06.18 18:23:00 - [27] Originally by: Fille Balle Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Stop posting ** please. Yes. I totally agree. This would fix so many problems with this game. More seriously though, I think this proposal would make life a lot more interesting, allow for more tactical situations, give miners some more tactical options for escape. /Supported I suggesated this before and i was told it would cause too much server lo0ad... People that are talking about logistical nightmare.. Do you have ANY IDEA OF how hard it is to hit something on accident in 3 dimetional space? WE are talking about tens of degrees of in rotation fo your turret, and you will miss target. Hte only way feature would work is if you go begind something on purpose, e.g. hide logistics fleet behind a massive capital, or with a frigate go behind asteroid. Realistically your chase of hitting anything smaller then a moon or a station on accident are next to 0. Quote:** Would be a logistical nightmare.... Corpie A and B decide to test out there ships Corpie A sits off at 80 KM with jump gate between him and B A fires off a round of his cannons... @ B C jumps in and gets nailed with 2000 DPS and loses his shuttle... now let's see how low is the chanse of this happening. I will not be lazy and will do the math. When you jump in you jump at 15 km from jump gate. 415^23.12 gives us surface area of about 2.8 billion meters squared. sig radius of a shuttle is 25m, that's cross-sectional area os less then 1962 m^2, we will take sise of projectile as 0 because it is so small there is no poin t of caclutating it. your chanse of hitting a shuttle would be BELOW 0.000007 and that is if you bullet is crossing the a5km radius of stargate at all, and we did not take in account that stargate itself is like 1-3 km is size depending on the model, that would make the chanse even lower.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:49:00 - [28] Edited by: Drake Draconis on 18/06/2009 22:54:37 Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Quote: You are simply not thinking this through... your so blinded by the brilliance of your own rear end that you cant see straight. You're an ignorant little fool. Stop posting **** please. I do not really see how the game mechanism that allows LINE-OF-SIGHT that were used on missiles could not be used on e.g. projectiles. Simply quick way would be to alter projectiles with missile launcher code but with projectile animation, then have the altered projectile act as a missile, but with instant hits; 50,000 m/s. Oh so I suppose that you expect CCP to snap there fingers and make it so? Are you really that dense to think that programing such a feat would be so easy? How old are you again? What is it do you do for a living again?
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:54:00 - [29] Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev Originally by: Fille Balle Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Stop posting ** please. Yes. I totally agree. This would fix so many problems with this game. More seriously though, I think this proposal would make life a lot more interesting, allow for more tactical situations, give miners some more tactical options for escape. /Supported I suggesated this before and i was told it would cause too much server lo0ad... People that are talking about logistical nightmare.. Do you have ANY IDEA OF how hard it is to hit something on accident in 3 dimetional space? WE are talking about tens of degrees of in rotation fo your turret, and you will miss target. Hte only way feature would work is if you go begind something on purpose, e.g. hide logistics fleet behind a massive capital, or with a frigate go behind asteroid. Realistically your chase of hitting anything smaller then a moon or a station on accident are next to 0. Quote:** Would be a logistical nightmare.... Corpie A and B decide to test out there ships Corpie A sits off at 80 KM with jump gate between him and B A fires off a round of his cannons... @ B C jumps in and gets nailed with 2000 DPS and loses his shuttle... now let's see how low is the chanse of this happening. I will not be lazy and will do the math. When you jump in you jump at 15 km from jump gate. 415^23.12 gives us surface area of about 2.8 billion meters squared. sig radius of a shuttle is 25m, that's cross-sectional area os less then 1962 m^2, we will take sise of projectile as 0 because it is so small there is no poin t of caclutating it. your chanse of hitting a shuttle would be BELOW 0.000007 and that is if you bullet is crossing the a5km radius of stargate at all, and we did not take in account that stargate itself is like 1-3 km is size depending on the model, that would make the chanse even lower. Which points a very clear problem out... precision is the key factor in such a thing. Would require far more computing power and far more calculations than normally seen in such a game. And that data has to be relayed to others... much like a 3D Space First Person Shooter without a floor... The algorithms alone would be a nightmare... the math you left out... is far more complicated than it looks. For every object... there are even more factors to add to the table... Much like calculating the water ripples on a pond with more than one object present.
Admiral IceBlock Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.06.22 06:20:00 - [30] If you do not have anything else to add than "you're dumb and do not understand programming", I suggest you to just shut it. Drawing a line between two objects for every shot fired is not THAT resource intensive. I still want clarification of the issue given the reasons I have described above. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.