EVE Search - [Proposal] Physically 'correct' planets

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Proposal] Physically 'correct' planets

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.02 12:23:00 - [1] Relevant thread in features section: Issue with planets Summary: While new visuals for planets are awesome it is sad to see that when one does 'show info' on them you can find some quite immersion breaking numbers. For example several planets that are by the backstory dense populations have temperatures or atmospheric pressure that is not suitable for life as we know it. One can also find for example gas giants that are far too light and far too close to their parent stars to be that or ice planets in so tight orbits around their parent stars that the 'ice' should have melting temperatures of lead to remain solid. So the proposal is to poke at CCP a bit to get some better planetary models implemented before planetary interaction arrives. I'm not asking it to be 'let's do PhD on it' kind of complex and 'correct', but some kind of complex enough model that takes into account a bit more than just calculating surfce temperature of planet as if it has no atmosphere and then deciding it's atmospheric pressure entirely by random number generator. For example something like StarGen modified to better suit the EVE universe. It would be especially awesome if same model would be applied also to moons.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.02 12:25:00 - [2] I will support my proposal ofc. As will be all my alt accounts.
Brian Khan StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.02 12:26:00 - [3] Support!
Vlad Wormwing StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.02 12:26:00 - [4] Support!
Tehnomaag StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.02 12:27:00 - [5] Support!
Tuleingel	Posted - 2010.01.02 12:28:00 - [6] Support!
H3llHound Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing	Posted - 2010.01.02 12:59:00 - [7] Cause the real world isnt good enough __________________________________________________ We are Recruiting
Rebekbar	Posted - 2010.01.02 20:04:00 - [8] Great idea, I will support
LATASH III Honored By Death	Posted - 2010.01.02 20:19:00 - [9] Edited by: LATASH III on 02/01/2010 20:20:03 Support
Herschel Yamamoto Agent-Orange	Posted - 2010.01.02 22:15:00 - [10] Minor and low priority, but planets that adhere to the laws of the universe(gravitation, density, etc)would be nice. If it can be redone automatically, I'm for it - I wouldn't wish that many calculations on a human, but if a computer is doing it, sure.
Isaac Starstriker The Confederate Navy Forever Unbound	Posted - 2010.01.03 02:07:00 - [11] Meh, this is really low-priority in the big scheme of things. But I'll support --Isaac Signature is now under construction: check back in a couple weeks. Or months.... AMAAR VICTOR! "You just can't fix stupid"
Pistrik Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.01.03 03:52:00 - [12] Just enjoy the pretty planets and stop whining -.-.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.04 12:03:00 - [13] Originally by: Pistrik Just enjoy the pretty planets and stop whining -.-. Hehe. It's not whining as I quite like the new visuals. It just would be added awesome if the new skins would be glued into locations where they make sense. Unlike current 'temperate earthlike' skins 60 AU from sun like parent stars with surface temperatures low enough to have atmospheric gases in solid forms.
Magnus Nordir Nordir Industries	Posted - 2010.01.04 13:06:00 - [14] Originally by: Pistrik Just enjoy the pretty planets and stop whining -.-. OP had a perfectly valid point. I don't mind our ships breaking elementary laws of physics as much, but planets should at least roughly stick to them. --------------------------- Only those who surrender are lost
Rodj Blake PIE Inc.	Posted - 2010.01.04 13:40:00 - [15] Edited by: Rodj Blake on 04/01/2010 13:40:03 Supported. There are planets in the game classed as Temperate with surface temperatures of only a few Kelvin. That's cold enough to make even Geordies say "It's a bit nippy." Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
Maxsim Goratiev Imperium Technologies	Posted - 2010.01.04 17:59:00 - [16] Quote: I'm not asking it to be 'let's do PhD on it Well, maybe it is time for CCP to get a PHD and fix planets stats and some items descriptions. Also, maybe it is time to get rid of marines that weigh one ton each, I know they would get big muscly guys into the army, but their should be a limit. Anyway, it looks absolutely ridiculous when you have 3 first planets ice ones, then you have a gas giant and like 2 lava planets, and then a temperate world. Does not make any sense. stares at another temperate world with gravity of 5G, covered with oceans and with temperature of 77 kelvins. So yes, maybe let's get a PhD for him to check that all the stuff devs put in actually makes a slightest bit of sense.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.05 08:36:00 - [17] Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev Well, maybe it is time for CCP to get a PHD and fix planets stats and some items descriptions. They do have a physicks PhD. It's the one who wrote the original 'physiks engine' and filled the EVE universe with leftover beer. If I remeber correct he is specced in chaos physiks. They sent him to china though where he tries to find a way to fill the planetary enviroments with beer. One must be at least consistent afterall. The EVE starsystems themselves are 'physically correct' other than planet velocities (that are set to zero for now). I mean you can have planets with that kind of masses in those locations where they are in reasonably stable manner. It's just parameters (other than mass) of those planets and moons that do not make a lot of sense and seem to have implemented in some random manner as aftertought. What I would also love to see (but it's ofc not as essential as correct planetary information) is some irregularity in the shapes of moons that are too small/light to condense properly into spherical form under their own gravity. And as far as too heavy marines go - I have always assumed that they carry some kind of power armor and heavy equipment on that.
Wikis	Posted - 2010.01.07 15:21:00 - [18] as a matter of fact, has anyone tried flying directly towards a planet on mwd sufficiently long ? no ? well here is what happens, the planet turns out to be just an empty sphere and once you reach it it turns inside out and you continue flying inwards but you dont see a planet in front of you but rather an empty space....
Tyson Gallane 22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit General Panic.	Posted - 2010.01.07 15:37:00 - [19] I'm embarrassed to say I hadn't noticed this shocking detail. Supported! T.
Jakub Trokowski FW Inc	Posted - 2010.01.07 16:05:00 - [20] Supported. Smile, always! ;)
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.01.07 21:22:00 - [21] You can add stars to this list of inconsistencies as well. I'm not going to go into the likelihood of different star types or the utter lack of multi-star systems in Eve. The logical side of my brain freaks out when I look at some of the classes and diameters of the stars, let alone that they would have planets orbiting them. I seem to recall Jita originally being a Blue Main Sequence (shown in description) - silly improbability of having planets as well as being horribly huge and unstable stars - but attributes (they changed them?) show an F1V. Unfortunately, they also show the star's diameter - <0.4 solar radii - which makes everything terribly improbable again (not to mention the star is very blue still). Not just the size-temp comparison, but all the planets orbiting something that size. Fix Local
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.01.07 22:51:00 - [22] It's a minor point, but I can't think of anything it could possibly break, so supported.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.09 08:47:00 - [23] Originally by: Bagehi You can add stars to this list of inconsistencies as well. I'm not going to go into the likelihood of different star types or the utter lack of multi-star systems in Eve. As far as multi-star systems go then according to backstory all the stars with stargates are binary or even multi-star systems, as you can not put stargate in single star system. The neighbours of the binary star systems are just kinda supposed to be far enough from the star you are visiting to now show up on the system map. I have myself also wondered though often, how come we are visiting only one of the stars in those binary systems - if one of them has planets then how come second one does not have ? Unless it's something silly-exotic and utterly impropable. If one can have planets in stable orbits then gravity works both ways and second one should be far enough to allow stable orbits - ie there should also be stable orbits possible around the other star.
Uronksur Suth	Posted - 2010.01.09 09:05:00 - [24] Please, CCP, please?..... It would probably be an utter pain to implement, but its something to put on the back burner and get someday down the road, right?
Ogogov	Posted - 2010.01.09 17:14:00 - [25] Supported
OzDeaDMeaT The Goodies	Posted - 2010.01.12 01:22:00 - [26] /supported I know its a game but having an ice planet next to a sun is just ******ed. Eve-au.com News Reporter
No Mauk'Ob Murientor Tribe	Posted - 2010.01.12 06:20:00 - [27] Please before Planetary interaction? interacting with a 'temperate' world with 20x the gravity of earth and temperatures of 54k would mean that all we could do is provide the populace with warm coats and exoskeletons... at least require that for a planet to be considered temperate it falls in the Habitable Zone of a star? ------------------------------------------------ Captain No Mauk'Ob Murientor Tribe Navy 1st MCW MURIE is Recruiting!
Ben Fenix Caldari Empire Luminance Alliance	Posted - 2010.01.14 07:04:00 - [28] Pretty good idea. Never thought of that. Supported! __________________________________ Space is massive. Humanity is not.
Jin Nib Resplendent Knives	Posted - 2010.01.14 07:13:00 - [29] It'd be nice if this were implemented. But it's hardly a pressing matter. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
Normandy Xavier Nova Security Systems	Posted - 2010.01.14 11:01:00 - [30] Supported!
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2010.01.14 13:28:00 - [31] Supported. Ice caps would be nice on some of the planets too.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.01.15 09:26:00 - [32] Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Supported. Ice caps would be nice on some of the planets too. That also, but it would propably take quite sophisticated atmospheric model to pull that one off. Would be very awesome. I sure hope than when the dust arrives eventuaqlly there will be enviroments available that are similar to the iceplanet Hoth, from star wars. Ice and snow enviroments should not be that hard to pull off, unless you are trying to create some very spectacular icicles ofc ;) Plus added dangers of slippery surfaces.
Bunyip Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2010.01.19 09:24:00 - [33] CCP just finished a lot of work with planetary designs and layouts, so they might not want to delve that deeply just a few months later into planetary design. However, I would appreciate these changes. As someone who uses the scientific articles to immerse myself into the game, I think this would help me get deeper into the game, as well as others who see this game as more than the next ship to destroy or the next item to build. There is anything wrong with these behaviors - as an MMO, the game is what you make of it. Supported. "May all your hits be crits." - Knights of the Dinner Table.
Thera Romana	Posted - 2010.01.19 22:26:00 - [34] need to fix the planets before we move onto them. Thanks for support on my topic as well.
Jonas Trelonian	Posted - 2010.01.20 20:52:00 - [35] +1 Also it would be nice if all celestial bodies were correctly-sized... i.e. filling the entire screen instead of being marginally larger than a space station...
Amy Garzan The Warp Rats	Posted - 2010.01.21 04:01:00 - [36] signed -------------------------------------------------- 101010 The Answer to Life, The Universe, and Everything
IlluminatedOne Tycho Brahe Fan Club	Posted - 2010.01.21 22:16:00 - [37] Signed.
Solo Player	Posted - 2010.01.23 20:08:00 - [38] supporting this once again I realy wish CSM members would have the kindness to pop in these threads somewhat more often and not just voice their opinion but actually anoounce their intention to take this further.
Arnold Predator	Posted - 2010.01.24 07:58:00 - [39] Edited by: Arnold Predator on 24/01/2010 07:59:37 with so many systems this fix might be the biggest update CCP would ever need to do but with Dust coming out sometime soon. (i hope) having the planet say its 5K and having the Dust players walking around in shorts would really be a big oversite. I would also like to see planets orbit the suns. Another cool fix would that the planets can't be jumped/flown though.
Bongvir	Posted - 2010.02.13 14:00:00 - [40] I think this would be one of the high priority things that should be sorted before relasing planetary interaction as it would be a lot harder to fix afterwards. So Supported.
Jonah Pod	Posted - 2010.02.14 10:55:00 - [41] On really low priority, yes. This will add some consistency to the game.
Salasilm	Posted - 2010.02.18 11:22:00 - [42] Supporting
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2010.02.18 15:16:00 - [43] Supported. Also, please add polar ice caps to the relevant planets. ...
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.02.20 07:31:00 - [44] Tyrannis Seems like our planetary interaction will be the next expansion. So last opportunity to fix 'the physics' of planets!
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2010.02.20 07:55:00 - [45] Why not. More immersion is always good.
Kolya Medz	Posted - 2010.02.20 22:24:00 - [46] Support 100% this is a very good point.
InColdBlood	Posted - 2010.02.20 23:15:00 - [47] Edited by: InColdBlood on 20/02/2010 23:15:39 Hey kids listen up! Its a game! You are just a fat cola drinking zit faced kid playing a game on a pc your dad bought for you. Whats the point in CCP spending Ph.D time figuring out graphics for somehing that does not matter and you could not understand anyway. And NO! Ph.D is NOT short for Pretty Huge ****. Listen to an educated guy (MBA), just make it look good! And yes MBA is shot for Married But Available, in case that are any girls reading this.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.02.21 13:29:00 - [48] Originally by: InColdBlood Hey kids listen up! Its a game! You are just a fat cola drinking zit faced kid playing a game on a pc your dad bought for you. Whats the point in CCP spending Ph.D time figuring out graphics for somehing that does not matter and you could not understand anyway. And NO! Ph.D is NOT short for Pretty Huge ****. Listen to an educated guy (MBA), just make it look good! And yes MBA is short for Married But Available, in case that are any girls reading this. Immersion. If this would be fairytale setting with flying castles and magic it would not matter a lot. But it is not. In EVE star systems are supposed to be 'real' in the sense that planets with those parameters can have stable orbits in those positions they have. Guy who coded it had PhD in chaos physics if I remember correct. It might not matter for someone with only master of business administration (if I understand correct your MBA). But it does matter to some people with education in the field of hard science. By the way - wiggling around with degree in forums is thin ice. For example I happen to have MSc in physics and are in my last year of PhD studies (And I must also admit that nature has been gentle enough for me so your statement about what it is not might be also incorrect ).
Jin Nib Resplendent Knives	Posted - 2010.02.22 01:11:00 - [49] Correct me if I'm wrong but planets and such are actually stationary and don't orbit around the sun. Personally for me, having planets that followed their orbital paths would be much higher on the list then this proposal. Even better would be if all orbital objects like moons and asteroids etc. did this but planets alone would work too. IE this proposal is worried about having realistic planets according to their distances from the sun but the fact that they don't rotate and orbit would mean that having "correct" planets would mean having planets with one side scorched away and the other side lost in perpetual darkness and cold. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.02.22 05:03:00 - [50] Originally by: Jin Nib Correct me if I'm wrong but planets and such are actually stationary and don't orbit around the sun. Personally for me, having planets that followed their orbital paths would be much higher on the list then this proposal. Even better would be if all orbital objects like moons and asteroids etc. did this but planets alone would work too. IE this proposal is worried about having realistic planets according to their distances from the sun but the fact that they don't rotate and orbit would mean that having "correct" planets would mean having planets with one side scorched away and the other side lost in perpetual darkness and cold. Yes. But that is kinda big change to how planets are implemented in EVE. And it's really relevant only for inner planets, further away ones have 'years' that can have a lot longer than on earth - ie presently passed 7 years of EVE would have caused only small move in their positions. I do agree ofc that if they would actually move and rotate it would be even more uber. But all is not lost, there is already light at the end of tunnel Light - CCP is aware that at least temperatures are random in the info fields of planets and seem to be willing to do something about those. So when they do that script perhaps they can also include very small and very basic model that sticks 'right' skins in more or less right places by making use some simple planetary model (if they dont have time to do complex one) in consistent manner.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2010.02.22 18:07:00 - [51] Originally by: Jin Nib Correct me if I'm wrong but planets and such are actually stationary and don't orbit around the sun. Personally for me, having planets that followed their orbital paths would be much higher on the list then this proposal. Even better would be if all orbital objects like moons and asteroids etc. did this but planets alone would work too. IE this proposal is worried about having realistic planets according to their distances from the sun but the fact that they don't rotate and orbit would mean that having "correct" planets would mean having planets with one side scorched away and the other side lost in perpetual darkness and cold. The planets do rotate. Maybe not all (or not all at the same speed)? During EVE beta the planets actually moved around their star; however CCP decided that this had insignificant impact on the game (likely for the same reasons mentioned in the post above) for the cost in server resources. ...
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.02.22 19:32:00 - [52] Originally by: InColdBlood Edited by: InColdBlood on 21/02/2010 00:04:56 Edited by: InColdBlood on 20/02/2010 23:15:39 Hey kids listen up! Its a game! You are just a fat cola drinking zit faced kid playing a game on a pc your dad bought for you. Whats the point in CCP spending Ph.D time figuring out graphics for somehing that does not matter and you could not understand anyway. And NO! Ph.D is NOT short for Pretty Huge ****. Listen to an educated guy (MBA), just make it look good! And yes MBA is short for Married But Available, in case that are any girls reading this. False. False. False. I am extremely embarrassed that a fellow MBA would say such statements that are contrary to business/marketing/economics theories. I will imagine you are lying about your degree so I do not have to question how far the scholastic requirements for the degree have declined. Incidentally, it hardly would take a PhD in Astrophysics to sort this out. Please tell us what company you work for. I, for one, really want to know what shiny new purchase might be from a company with a "just make it look good!" attitude. In fact, it would be nice to know so I don't accidentally invest in the company. Fix Local
Maxsim Goratiev Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate	Posted - 2010.02.22 19:59:00 - [53] actually, if we are improving planets, let's get them spinning again as well. InColdBlood- if you have nothing to add to the conversation except for personal insults, please refrain from commenting. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes.StevieSG
Aion Morpheus	Posted - 2010.02.22 20:39:00 - [54]
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2010.02.24 00:24:00 - [55] Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev actually, if we are improving planets, let's get them spinning again as well. Planet spin is already in the game. It's just slower then it used to be, which is a good thing IMO. Just to check myself I just flew around Oursulaert and every planet with visible land/ice mass was unquestionably spinning. ...
Kytanos Termek Perkone	Posted - 2010.02.24 04:36:00 - [56] Low priority, dont overrule anything more important to look at it. but with Tyr around the corner maybe you can assign a dev or two to fix it.
Kumatsu Metanoia. Consortium.	Posted - 2010.02.24 09:32:00 - [57] Originally by: InColdBlood Edited by: InColdBlood on 21/02/2010 00:04:56 Edited by: InColdBlood on 20/02/2010 23:15:39 Hey kids listen up! Its a game! You are just a fat cola drinking zit faced kid playing a game on a pc your dad bought for you. Whats the point in CCP spending Ph.D time figuring out graphics for somehing that does not matter and you could not understand anyway. And NO! Ph.D is NOT short for Pretty Huge ****. Listen to an educated guy (MBA), just make it look good! And yes MBA is short for Married But Available, in case that are any girls reading this. This guy must be working on the next expansion with ccp and doesn't want more of a workload. I agree if CCP wants to add new features as so it should be based more on a realistic aspect. Back to your drawing board gents.
Eowarian D SI Radio	Posted - 2010.02.24 13:18:00 - [58] Originally by: Carniflex I have myself also wondered though often, how come we are visiting only one of the stars in those binary systems I totally agree. I live in a cataclysmic wormhole system, which means 2 stars and an environmental phenomena (which looks like a 3rd star, but I guess it's more like a halo). In our star system we can only warp to the main star, not to the other one. It would be nice indeed to have both stars in the planetary overview, 'cause both stars ARE physically/visually there. Originally by: Carniflex ... if one of them has planets then how come second one does not have ? Unless it's something silly-exotic and utterly improbable. If one can have planets in stable orbits then gravity works both ways and second one should be far enough to allow stable orbits - ie there should also be stable orbits possible around the other star. Not quite right, I think. As far as my knowledge go, dual stars are mainly close to each other, in very close orbit. If not, the gravity disk will be too unstable to allow orbiting planets. Why not planets around both stars? Impossible. The gravity disks of both stars has become one, in the same direction as the stars orbit each other. So only 1 gravity disk remains to allow planets orbiting, with both stars in the center. A planet that should cross in between both stars will be ripped apart, due to the gravitation of those stars. But so far my theory. :) I agree CCP should stick a bit closer to physical laws and shift the order of the planets so it makes sence. Thanks for bringing this up!
Andreus LeHane Mixed Metaphor	Posted - 2010.02.24 16:05:00 - [59] Edited by: Andreus LeHane on 24/02/2010 16:12:34 Most definitely supported. -----
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.02.24 17:57:00 - [60] Originally by: Eowarian D Originally by: Carniflex ... if one of them has planets then how come second one does not have ? Unless it's something silly-exotic and utterly improbable. If one can have planets in stable orbits then gravity works both ways and second one should be far enough to allow stable orbits - ie there should also be stable orbits possible around the other star. Not quite right, I think. As far as my knowledge go, dual stars are mainly close to each other, in very close orbit. If not, the gravity disk will be too unstable to allow orbiting planets. Why not planets around both stars? Impossible. The gravity disks of both stars has become one, in the same direction as the stars orbit each other. So only 1 gravity disk remains to allow planets orbiting, with both stars in the center. A planet that should cross in between both stars will be ripped apart, due to the gravitation of those stars. But so far my theory. :) I agree CCP should stick a bit closer to physical laws and shift the order of the planets so it makes sence. Thanks for bringing this up! Which brings up the point that both stars should be in the center of each system, if these systems are supposed to be binaries. Planets would most likely be ejected (or live a short life in degenerating orbit) from the system if their orbit fell between two stars. Fix Local
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.02.25 10:06:00 - [61] Originally by: Bagehi Which brings up the point that both stars should be in the center of each system, if these systems are supposed to be binaries. Planets would most likely be ejected (or live a short life in degenerating orbit) from the system if their orbit fell between two stars. Stable planetary orbits in binary stars are possible, as long as the stars are far enough from each other. There are also some more exotic orbits possible ofc like planets that switch the 'parent star' once in a while, but propability of those orbits is low enough to neglet those. Then again with EVE being real time game one can also get away with totally unstable orbits even, as it can (and will) take several millenia to get rid of the planet that is in process of being ejected from the binary system. If that kind of planets were present in EVE they should be very very rare ofc, as propability that this happens 'right now' in the evolution of binary star system would be very low. It seems reasonable to assume that binary systems that are unsuitable for more or less stable planetary orbits do not have stargates constructed around them. Implementation of binary star systems itself does not seem very hard, all you would need to do is to make second star (and possible planets) around it visible in the overview. Granted it would make some damn long warps (possibility to explain why second star was not visible previously is distance and need for 'better warp drive' to cover long distances between binary stars). For Example Alpha Centauri is triple star system, A and B components in relatively tight orbit around each other (~11 to 35 AU to each other) and then one small star (component C) far away orbiting those two at some 12 000 AU or so roughly. It would take very long time to warp from A to C as even in interceptor rigged for warp speed (~20 au/s) it would take roughly 600 seconds or 10 minutes. Would sure give a meaning to the warp speed of the ship tho. However - making second star in binary star systems (all the systems that have stargates are binary systems according to the backstory) visible and acsessible is in my opinion a lot easier to do in some future expansion than sorting the mess with planets after Tyrannis has been relased if they are not looked before that expansion. It would not end well at all if someone would find that their 'terrestial' planet 64 AU from the star has frozen to the core overnight after some DT 3 years from now afterall.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.02.26 09:00:00 - [62] Edited by: Carniflex on 26/02/2010 09:01:18 I would like to add ofcource that Alpha Centauri might not be the best possible example of binary system, as third component (Proxima Centauri or component C) is at bit extreme range from others. 12 000 AU is approx 0.2 lightyears. As I'm not specialized in astrophysics then I do not know what is the average distance between binary stars but I would speculate that is somewhere around ~20 to 200 AU or so usually. In EVE the 'real' number is not that important as CCP is in 'control' of the EVE galaxy and thus almost any number between 10 and few thousand AU's might be believeable. The habitable zone (zone where liquid water can exsist) is for almost all stars relatively close to the star tho, somewhere from 0.5 AU for really small ones up to 3 or perhaps even 4 AU for really hot ones. Hot ones have ofc some problems as far as evolving life goes, like their relatively short lifespans and some very energetic processes in the evolution of that massive stars. As far as distribution of planet types goes tho, as mentioned before relatively simple and robust atmospheric model would be sufficent to get consistent planetary types. Plasma planets can be explained by throwing some exotic material into the atmosphere and lava planets are also possible in the younger starsystems or following some violent events, like collision of two smaller planets. Afterall you do not need a lot of parameters for it - a distance from the star, composition of initial gas cloud (or just flat out atmospheric composition of the planet) and mass of the planet would give you aready pretty good picture what to expect. Ie. what gases can the planet keep and can there be greenhouse effect. Polar ice caps would need ofc a bit more sophiscated model. Anyway - actual accuracy of model is not as relevant as getting consistent results. For best results ofc it would be uber if they would hire someone from astrophyciks or atmospheric physics field as consultant for planetary overahul, but if they dont want then giving someone in the company with masters degree in the field of rigid sciences a week to google around and wrap their head around what is done and known would give also pretty good model I think.
Mistress Servelan Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2010.02.26 13:50:00 - [63] And correct the fact that they don't orbit their respective stars. And correct the fact that moons don't orbit their planets. And correct the fact that gates in the middle of nowhere don't orbit anything. It'd certainly make bookmarks more interesting.
Jin Nib Resplendent Knives	Posted - 2010.02.26 14:08:00 - [64] Originally by: Mistress Servelan It'd certainly make bookmarks more interesting. Yeah, I agree. Each little step though. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
Nekre Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.02.26 14:20:00 - [65] /signed
Kaarnakivi	Posted - 2010.03.05 11:25:00 - [66]
Calarin The Knights Templar R.A.G.E	Posted - 2010.03.06 11:35:00 - [67] Yes. I am not reading most of the replies, but if it hasn't been brought up I would like to see planet TYPEs depend on distance from star.... ie an ice planet at Planet I (closest to star) doesnt make much sense when you have lava planets very far out. Last time I checked, I believe they were random (correct me if I'm wrong)
Simokon Smegnet Incorporated	Posted - 2010.03.06 16:41:00 - [68]
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2010.03.10 15:24:00 - [69] It would be useful if those who support 'realistic planets' would voice this in the thread for today's Planetary Interaction dev blog. ...
Le Dentiste Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.03.10 16:16:00 - [70] I fully support this product/service.
SencneS Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks	Posted - 2010.03.10 17:34:00 - [71] I FULLY support this... There is just something wrong about a planet, "Temperate" planet 22.1AU from a Sun burning at 3,483K (3,210¦C or 5,810¦F) The planet is nice 21K (-421.6F or -252C) Lets also not forget the atmospheric pressure, on this lovely life bearing planet you can breath easy at a 65,050Pa, Which is AWESOME because you'll never be sick, bacteria dies at about 5,000 Pa, so there is no chance of getting sick on this planet. Amarr for Life
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.03.10 17:46:00 - [72] Originally by: CCP Fear We have provided a Astrophysicist from the University of Iceland with all our data related to planets and suns and he is doing various magic with it based on his expertise which should be included. Time to celebrate \o/ !!! Oh and there is new blog also about planetary interaction btw. Sounds pretty awesome.
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.03.10 18:23:00 - [73] Hurrah! Fix Local
tasman devil Imperium Galactica Omega Alliance	Posted - 2010.03.10 20:56:00 - [74] CCCC-COMBO BREAKER... - or not! :D supported... ---------------------------------- Even if you don't belive in God, Be prepared to meet him anytime...
Kyra Felann	Posted - 2010.03.10 22:32:00 - [75] To me, immersion is one of the most important things about EVE. Therefore I 100% support this.
Nareg Maxence JotunHeim Hird	Posted - 2010.03.11 08:43:00 - [76] This breaks immersion. As a programmer I would even say, it would be easy to fix.
Xenofarion	Posted - 2010.03.11 21:10:00 - [77] supported -- those who can, do those who can't, complain
Druadan YARRRDIES Inc.	Posted - 2010.03.12 02:08:00 - [78] Supported. Immersion is king. -Druadan CEO YARRRDIES Inc.
Sarai Moltiva Biomorphic Incorporated Dragoon Federation	Posted - 2010.03.13 16:51:00 - [79] bump I'd suggest EVE have a Darwin Awards forum, but half of the players would end up there...
RaWBLooD	Posted - 2010.03.14 20:03:00 - [80] Edited by: RaWBLooD on 14/03/2010 20:03:23 Planets can be varying temperatures depending on their atmospheres and the centers of them. Also suns can be various sizes and stages of life. miners-you can: switch, rob, wardec, nerf, scam them, buy below market, pirate them on their way to sell. mining < trading, ratting, manufacturing from market bought minerals,they still wont go away
Galstab McGee	Posted - 2010.03.14 21:24:00 - [81] Seems good to me
Aldrad Aku.	Posted - 2010.03.19 11:06:00 - [82] Edited by: Aldrad on 19/03/2010 11:06:38 /signed.
Zilberfrid	Posted - 2010.03.19 12:46:00 - [83] Yes, something should be calculated to make the planets make sense. This should be added before tyrannis, after that is can no longer be feasibly done. Why? then planets are more then just backdrops, they are part of the active game, changing them then would be a player nuisance. I also support moving planets, bookmarks would be more interesting, but that is of less importance than a living universe.
Jin Nib Resplendent Knives	Posted - 2010.03.19 18:58:00 - [84] Originally by: Zilberfrid Yes, something should be calculated to make the planets make sense. This should be added before tyrannis, after that is can no longer be feasibly done. Why? then planets are more then just backdrops, they are part of the active game, changing them then would be a player nuisance. I also support moving planets, bookmarks would be more interesting, but that is of less importance than a living universe. Post 69 in this thread.
Chall Valleck	Posted - 2010.03.21 01:49:00 - [85] Supported!
Usagi Hino	Posted - 2010.03.21 07:11:00 - [86] Edited by: Usagi Hino on 21/03/2010 07:11:17 I also support this
Zilberfrid	Posted - 2010.03.23 09:25:00 - [87] I'm sorry I did not see that before. You made my day.
DarthBadness	Posted - 2010.03.26 08:01:00 - [88] Originally by: Carniflex Relevant thread in features section: Issue with planets Summary: While new visuals for planets are awesome it is sad to see that when one does 'show info' on them you can find some quite immersion breaking numbers. For example several planets that are by the backstory dense populations have temperatures or atmospheric pressure that is not suitable for life as we know it. One can also find for example gas giants that are far too light and far too close to their parent stars to be that or ice planets in so tight orbits around their parent stars that the 'ice' should have melting temperatures of lead to remain solid. Before something is fixed that dose not need fixing, some of the first planets that were discoverd outside our own solar system were gass giants, called Hot Jupiters, orbiting very close to their parent stars. So gass giants could prolly be just left at their current locations I think. Correct me if im wrong.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.03.26 13:38:00 - [89] Originally by: DarthBadness Some of the first planets that were discoverd outside our own solar system were gass giants, called Hot Jupiters, orbiting very close to their parent stars. So gass giants could prolly be just left at their current locations I think. Correct me if im wrong. You are correct. Gas giants can appear anywhere in the starsystem, as long as they are able to condense fast enough before the star starts its reactions and blows away the gas and dust from the center. What I was poking at however was the mass of those gas giants, as it was a bit too small to be gas giant. To be gas giant the planet should have enough mass to keep some of the lighter gases. Helium would be good start although I do not know where the line is drawn usually. Then again, this issue has already sorted the best possible way (in my opinion) by CCP hiring the astrophysics guy from local university to take a good look at their planets and stars.
Misticrevalation	Posted - 2010.04.14 11:52:00 - [90] Edited by: Misticrevalation on 14/04/2010 11:52:37 Edited by: Misticrevalation on 14/04/2010 11:52:09 Originally by: Aldrad Edited by: Aldrad on 19/03/2010 11:06:38 /signed. Hi Submaster/Aldrad. Still shooting your own alliance members, then boasting how you planned it, then dreaming up some "Overview bug" fairytale? http://wshot.griefwatch.net/?p=details&kill=3836 I find the fact that you were willing to pay compensation and risk being kicked because of desperation to get a killmail. It's not unknown though, so you're not the first.
Velocifero	Posted - 2010.04.14 12:42:00 - [91] Yes please please please if you sort one thing before Tyrannis sort this. It really screws with the immersion of the game world when ice planets sit next to a sun and gas giants ponder on the edge of the solarsystem. Supported
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2010.05.03 20:06:00 - [92] SISI has been updated with the new planet type distribution. Perhaps the OP author can check for 'realism'. ...
unloadedx16 Hearts Revolution	Posted - 2010.05.03 21:53:00 - [93]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.