EVE Search - EVE weapons

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

EVE weapons

» 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)
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:25:00 - [1] Do eve weapons seem kind of primitive in scifi terms? Its 25000 Years into the future and we are shooting rail guns and lasers measured in the gigawatt range, and missiles that have a yield smaller then a modern day nuclear weapons. it seems silly that this is the extent of weapons technology in the year 27000-28000.
Estel Arador	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:28:00 - [2] I guess you missed the memo telling you all civilisation collapsed for thousands of years... Free jumpclone service\|1092 stations!
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:32:00 - [3] Edited by: Jack Airron on 01/08/2010 09:32:37 Originally by: Estel Arador I guess you missed the memo telling you all civilisation collapsed for thousands of years... Yes, however taking into account he time of eves "dark age" they should still be 8000 years more advanced then us, for example today we have the technology to build a laser that outputs 1000 TW, a mega pulse laser in eve outputs 350ish GIGAwatts its absurd. not to mention drone bandwidth in the megabits range.
Johnny Dexter	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:36:00 - [4] They shoot. Things blow up. Working as intended.
Solomunio Kzenig Amarr InterSun Freelance	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:37:00 - [5] Given the state of the server (lag) and the rubbish/broken content CCP seems to be content to produce, are you not suprised that the weapons in EVE are pathetic? Oh and RL =/= EVE .
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:42:00 - [6] Originally by: Jack Airron Edited by: Jack Airron on 01/08/2010 09:32:37 Originally by: Estel Arador I guess you missed the memo telling you all civilisation collapsed for thousands of years... Yes, however taking into account he time of eves "dark age" they should still be 8000 years more advanced then us, for example today we have the technology to build a laser that outputs 1000 TW, a mega pulse laser in eve outputs 350ish GIGAwatts its absurd. not to mention drone bandwidth in the megabits range. Link or it didnt happen. Anyway i assume the pulse time of that laser is measured in the picoseconds, that of eve lasers is in the seconds, that is a factor 1000 billion difference in energy delivered.
Estel Arador	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:43:00 - [7] Originally by: Jack Airron Yes, however taking into account he time of eves "dark age" they should still be 8000 years more advanced then us According to the timeline the first modern civilisation emerged barely 7000 years ago. How they could be "8000 years more advanced than us" is beyond me. Don't forget you have to subtract the age of our civilisation from the 7000 years the Caldari existed. What age would you put on our civilisation? Free jumpclone service\|1092 stations!
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:52:00 - [8] Originally by: Estel Arador Originally by: Jack Airron Yes, however taking into account he time of eves "dark age" they should still be 8000 years more advanced then us According to the timeline the first modern civilisation emerged barely 7000 years ago. How they could be "8000 years more advanced than us" is beyond me. Don't forget you have to subtract the age of our civilisation from the 7000 years the Caldari existed. What age would you put on our civilisation? our civilization is about 10000 years what you are not taking into account is the difference of human civilization and EVE civilization for instance no where in eve lore does it say they had a 1000 year black out in their technological evolution like we did thanks to religion and the dark ages. And you are assuming technology evolves on a liner scale when in reality it evolves exponentially with the first great discovery powering the next and the next and the next. (IE modern day computing) These points are all moot though because we have the technology now to do what eve weapons are doing. minus maby blasters.
ShahFluffers Gallente Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2010.08.01 09:55:00 - [9] Originally by: Jack Airron [today we have the technology to build a laser that outputs 1000 TW, a mega pulse laser in eve outputs 350ish GIGAwatts its absurd. not to mention drone bandwidth in the megabits range. My 4 cylinder car can go just as fast as my 8 cylinder truck... and it can do so using less gas. Just because something needs more to do something it doesn't necessarily make it better. In all seriousness... civilizations will all move at their own pace and advance technologies at varying rates, it just depends on what they deem to be most important. We can output 1000 TW lasers... in EvE humans can go from one edge of a solar system to another in under a minute. Or maybe it's simply cheaper to mass produce HUGE colossal weapons out of "outdated" weaponry. It's science FICTION... use your imagination and rationalize. _______________________ "Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown
Othran Brutor tribe	Posted - 2010.08.01 10:12:00 - [10] Originally by: Jack Airron Do eve weapons seem kind of primitive in scifi terms? Its 25000 Years into the future and we are shooting rail guns and lasers measured in the gigawatt range, and missiles that have a yield smaller then a modern day nuclear weapons. it seems silly that this is the extent of weapons technology in the year 27000-28000. Did you never wonder where and why the module stacking nerf came from? Basically people aren't too keen on their ships getting wtfbbqd instantly. Anyway if we were to go hyper-realistic then you'd have to plan that turn/orbit/warp minutes (or even hours/days) in advance and in combat you'd be firing at a spot where your opponent would be in minutes/hours. He wouldn't be able to alter his trajectory in time and would know he was going to die maybe 30 mins in advance and could do nothing about it as the velocity of the projectile/missile/charge would be well above that of any defensive munitions he could deploy. Sound like fun? Actually knowing you're going to die in 30 minutes would probably be a big improvement on current fleet lag - at least then you could get on with the rest of your day

Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.01 11:36:00 - [11] Edited by: Jack Airron on 01/08/2010 11:47:10 Edited by: Jack Airron on 01/08/2010 11:41:18 Originally by: ShahFluffers Edited by: ShahFluffers on 01/08/2010 10:02:35 Originally by: Jack Airron [today we have the technology to build a laser that outputs 1000 TW, a mega pulse laser in eve outputs 350ish GIGAwatts its absurd. not to mention drone bandwidth in the megabits range. My 4 cylinder car can go just as fast as my 8 cylinder truck... and it can do so using less gas. Just because something needs more to do something it doesn't necessarily make it better. In all seriousness... civilizations will all move at their own pace and advance technologies at varying rates, it just depends on what they deem to be most important. We can output 1000 TW lasers... in EvE humans can go from one edge of a solar system to another in under a minute. Or maybe it's simply cheaper to mass produce HUGE colossal weapons out of "outdated" weaponry. It's science FICTION... use your imagination and rationalize. edit: Originally by: Jack Airron our civilization is about 10000 years what you are not taking into account is the difference of human civilization and EVE civilization for instance no where in eve lore does it say they had a 1000 year black out in their technological evolution like we did thanks to religion and the dark ages. Actually, the lore does state that humans lost all of their previously held technology for about 10,000 years or so and had to rebuild from scratch. The exceptions to this are the Jovians and some of the other "ancient" races. From an EvE standpoint, we've only been in space for about 1000 years... and I'm going to go on a limb and say that most of that time was probably spent rebuilding the stargate network. (someone may want to fact check me on all this... I'm a little fuzzy with my EvE lore atm) Read the post again. Quote: Anyway if we were to go hyper-realistic then you'd have to plan that turn/orbit/warp minutes (or even hours/days) in advance and in combat you'd be firing at a spot where your opponent would be in minutes/hours. He wouldn't be able to alter his trajectory in time and would know he was going to die maybe 30 mins in advance and could do nothing about it as the velocity of the projectile/missile/charge would be well above that of any defensive munitions he could deploy. Its not about hyper realism, its about making the games scifi more scifi, all im saying if CCP could of made changes to the weapons so you think " my god that is truly frighting" and not "oh i saw that at last years DARPA conference" Dont get me wrong i love eve and i love the fact we are flying mini city's around some extremely advance technology completely out of the realm of possibility of what we have today, isn't that why people watch scifi? You know as well as i do that one thing that will never change in humanity no matter what galaxy they are in is the quest to find more advanced and better ways to kill each other.
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.01 11:45:00 - [12] Edited by: Jack Airron on 01/08/2010 11:45:35 stupid forum bug... double post my bad.
Mashie Saldana BFG Tech	Posted - 2010.08.01 12:19:00 - [13] Originally by: Jack Airron Do eve weapons seem kind of primitive in scifi terms? Not really, we can launch small cars at 250km/s.
OmniBeton	Posted - 2010.08.01 13:02:00 - [14] We still use weapons whose working principles were introduced centuries ago.
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.08.01 13:23:00 - [15] Originally by: OmniBeton We still use weapons whose working principles were introduced centuries ago. Well put. And modern firearms are quite a bit more effective than the old musket. The OP specifically mentioned railguns in particular, and sure we have some prototypes for those and (iirc) some major problems with them. What we do not have are railguns that fire 425mm shells full of antimatter. Comparing an EVE Railgun to a modern one is like comparing a musket to an AK47. _________________________________ ROCKET STATUS: NOT FIXED
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.08.01 13:25:00 - [16] Much like evolution, technology has no set direction or timescale. Things are developed to meet the needs of the developers, just like organisms throughout the generations achieve equilibrium with the conditions their environment impose on them. There is no guarantee that in 25000 years there will be more advanced technology, any technology, or even things descended from human beings. So the fact that the denizens of New Eden look anthropomorphic and have any technology should be more conspicuous then the fact that they don't have more advanced technology. Originally by: Dr Reinhold Eve is the endgame. Every other game you have played has just been preparation for this.
McRoll Minmatar Heatseekers	Posted - 2010.08.01 14:25:00 - [17] On the contrary to the OP I like that Eve's weapons have something in common with today's technology. Science fiction means fiction based on known scientific facts and laws of nature. It's not like shooting a giant fireball out of your hand and call it magic. Can just play elves and orks instead. Please ensure your signature is within the allowed size of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24,000 bytes. Navigator
ShahFluffers Gallente Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2010.08.01 18:50:00 - [18] Originally by: Jack Airron Its not about hyper realism, its about making the games scifi more scifi, all im saying if CCP could of made changes to the weapons so you think " my god that is truly frighting" and not "oh i saw that at last years DARPA conference" Iono about you... but the idea of a 425mm anti-matter charge hitting the surface of a planet is a tad frightening. Read this chronicle, Xenocracy, and read the capsuleer's threat near the end very carefully. It's also a matter of scale. We can't really see how big these weapons really are relative to the size of a person. You can kinda get a feel for the sizes in the frigate though. For example: looking at a Rifter (which is approximately the size of a Boeing 747) you look at 200mm autocannons, compare them to the size of the ****pit (which, though guesstimation, you think can hold about 4 people) are realize that the Rifter is flying around with tractor-trailer sized uzis that spit out a barrage of ammo every second or so. Ahh... imagination... _______________________ "Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown
Phil Exon Gallente Arcana Imperii Ltd. Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2010.08.01 19:19:00 - [19] YOUR IN A ****ING SPACE SHIP.
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.01 21:56:00 - [20] Originally by: McRoll On the contrary to the OP I like that Eve's weapons have something in common with today's technology. Science fiction means fiction based on known scientific facts and laws of nature. It's not like shooting a giant fireball out of your hand and call it magic. Can just play elves and orks instead. So you are comparing advanced technology to magic? you are whats wrong with people today the stanch opposition to any technology advancement based on the fact you dont understand it. to all other comments, you are still not taking into account that any race that can explore the galaxy, has FTL travel and FTL communications has means of Extreme power generation Must have unimaginable ways to wage war. and with the eve galaxy the 4 races are so close to each other of corce they would put their main focus into producing advanced weapons. people dont seem the grasp the fact of them being 8000 years more advanced then us. Look back 100 years and then tell me that technological advancement doesn't happen on a exponential scale. With the comment to the face that modern firearms still use the same basic principle as they did hundreds of years ago, its only been hundreds of years not 8000 like eve and we still use such weapons because they are effective to our targets IE people not giant flying city's.

Illwill Bill Fjortismaffian HYDRA RELOADED	Posted - 2010.08.01 22:16:00 - [21] I find the weapons in eve to be rather intimidating. We are talking about people who have capability of firing 50 nuclear torpedoes per minutes (Raven+Thor), laser cannons that can slice through thick armor at over 200 km range (Apoc+beams), railguns that fire 425mm shells filled with anti-matter plasma, not to mention the 1400mm nuclear artillery deployed by the Minmatar. Look at the payload, not the methods of delivering it.
okst666	Posted - 2010.08.01 22:27:00 - [22] The explosions / impact does not fit as well. When I see the impact of my 6 x 425mm on a frig...it could easily blast london from the map, but no...34 damage dealt... :/ And I am not even talking about the torp-explosion.
Karak Terrel	Posted - 2010.08.01 22:36:00 - [23] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Much like evolution, technology has no set direction or timescale. But evolution and technology both have exponential growth which is also called the law of accelerating returns. We are only a few decades away from really drastic changes. I don't know how long this is in the discussion now, but if you think about it, it really destroys most of the science fiction scenarios we have today. In my perception Eve is a combination of "todays humanity" with advanced technology but without some of the consequences of the technology. Fantasy games do the same thing all the time but back in time. They take "todays humanity" and build some fancy magic creatures around it. I think a game that reflects the reality for both genres, science fiction and fantasy would be really absurd. - Only batteries can prevent the singularity
DuKackBoon	Posted - 2010.08.02 00:17:00 - [24] Originally by: Jack Airron people dont seem the grasp the fact of them being 8000 years more advanced then us Because they are NOT!!! We know how to do FTL travel - just not how to generate enough power. And I doubt it'll be 8000 years until we find such a power source. By the way, don't tell me firing concentrated beams of Tachyons isn't sci-fi enough. At least, there's enough fiction, because Tachyons don't exist. Also don't tell me firing extreme quantities of Antimatter (Aurora Ominae) isn't very ****ing advanced.
Culmen Caldari Blood Phage Syndicate Dead Terrorists	Posted - 2010.08.02 00:32:00 - [25] Edited by: Culmen on 02/08/2010 00:32:54 Originally by: DuKackBoon We know how to do FTL travel - just not how to generate enough power. And I doubt it'll be 8000 years until we find such a power source. I'm calling BS on that, the closest thing we have to a plan for FTL is an Alcubierre Drive. And that's missing a device to create a warp bubble in a region that does not already contain one. Roughly analogous to trying to build a cardboard box without knowledge on how to make cardboard. You are missing the critical piece. All the other device are missing cornerstone pieces or are simply laughable. You can argue semantics and say that given a quite literally beyond-infinite amount of energy, you could accelerate past light speed on conventional drive. But that's just sophistry. Originally by: DuKackBoon By the way, don't tell me firing concentrated beams of Tachyons isn't sci-fi enough. At least, there's enough fiction, because Tachyons don't exist. There is a major difference between hypothetical and non-existent. Remember quarks were hypothetical particles up until a few years ago. Tachyons are predicted by string theory and there is math to back it up. Also if and further more why do i even need a sig?
stoicfaux	Posted - 2010.08.02 01:24:00 - [26] Originally by: Jack Airron Do eve weapons seem kind of primitive in scifi terms? Its 25000 Years into the future and we are shooting rail guns and lasers measured in the gigawatt range, and missiles that have a yield smaller then a modern day nuclear weapons. it seems silly that this is the extent of weapons technology in the year 27000-28000. Are you kidding? Eve guns can fire through solid objects. Eve lasers aren't effective beyond a few hundred kilometers. Eve rail guns can fire lead which isn't magnetic. Eve railgun rounds also travel at insane velocities. Eve ships bounce off of each other instead of being destroyed by collisions. Eve can mass produce anti-matter rounds, but they still use other types of ammo! Eve ships would be completely immune to real world weapons, including nukes. As far as I can tell, Eve weapons travel a warp tunnel to the target and do damage via some exotic means. Railgun rounds don't hit the ship directly, instead they warp to the target and explode on a subspace level or warp space or something. There's no other explanation given the shooting through objects things, the insta hit thing, the limited range thing, the immune to collisions thing, and the fact that railguns shoot something other than solid slugs and anti-matter. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
Manfred Rickenbocker	Posted - 2010.08.02 01:40:00 - [27] Originally by: stoicfaux Originally by: Jack Airron Do eve weapons seem kind of primitive in scifi terms? Its 25000 Years into the future and we are shooting rail guns and lasers measured in the gigawatt range, and missiles that have a yield smaller then a modern day nuclear weapons. it seems silly that this is the extent of weapons technology in the year 27000-28000. Are you kidding? Eve guns can fire through solid objects. Eve lasers aren't effective beyond a few hundred kilometers. Eve rail guns can fire lead which isn't magnetic. Eve railgun rounds also travel at insane velocities. Eve ships bounce off of each other instead of being destroyed by collisions. Eve can mass produce anti-matter rounds, but they still use other types of ammo! Eve ships would be completely immune to real world weapons, including nukes. As far as I can tell, Eve weapons travel a warp tunnel to the target and do damage via some exotic means. Railgun rounds don't hit the ship directly, instead they warp to the target and explode on a subspace level or warp space or something. There's no other explanation given the shooting through objects things, the insta hit thing, the limited range thing, the immune to collisions thing, and the fact that railguns shoot something other than solid slugs and anti-matter. This... Also, just because something is registered as being "more powerful", i.e. has a higher wattage, doesnt mean it is actually more powerful. Even though we can generate several tera-watts of power and put them into the form of a laser doesnt solve several problems such as focusing, power dissipation, and rate of fire. ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times.
Winters Chill Amarr The Die Sect	Posted - 2010.08.02 01:40:00 - [28] Originally by: okst666 Edited by: okst666 on 01/08/2010 22:30:51 Edited by: okst666 on 01/08/2010 22:30:17 The explosions / impact do not fit as well. When I see the impact of my 6 x 425mm on a Cruiser...it could easily blast London off the map, but no...34 damage dealt... :/ And I am not even talking about the torp-explosion. nah, 425mm cannons would do alot of damage but they would not level a city not without prolonged bombardment. The Iowa class battleship used in WW2 main guns where 9 406mm cannons. The goal of starship weapons isn't to make a big bang, it would be to penetrate hull, venting atmosphere and killing crew or doing enough damage until key systems suffer catastrophic failure causing either the highly volatile reactor cores to explode or the ship is no longer able to function. And forget about orbital bombardment unless the projectile is super large or shielded nearly all would burn up in the atmosphere.
stoicfaux	Posted - 2010.08.02 02:11:00 - [29] Originally by: Winters Chill nah, 425mm cannons would do alot of damage but they would not level a city not without prolonged bombardment. The Iowa class battleship used in WW2 main guns where 9 406mm cannons. You're forgetting anti-matter rounds. A kilogram of AM can potentially release the equivalent of 43 metatons of TNT. Quote: The goal of starship weapons isn't to make a big bang, it would be to penetrate hull, venting atmosphere and killing crew or doing enough damage until key systems suffer catastrophic failure causing either the highly volatile reactor cores to explode or the ship is no longer able to function. Which doesn't happen per se. Key systems are 100% functional until the ship explodes. If ship collisions don't cause damage, then how is it possible for railguns, missiles, and projectile weapons to penetrate the hull? Quote: And forget about orbital bombardment unless the projectile is super large or shielded nearly all would burn up in the atmosphere. A Rokh can hit instantly out to 250km. I don't think the round would have time to burn up before hitting the ground. Or maybe you can reduce the power on the guns to avoid burning up the round in the atmosphere. Eve physics are Special(tm). ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
plastastic	Posted - 2010.08.02 02:15:00 - [30] If i remember right the back story explains this away by saying the guns they let you use are the civilian versions of the guns the ones used by the real navy's are alot bigger.

Esiel Renegade Serenity	Posted - 2010.08.02 02:34:00 - [31] Originally by: Jack Airron to all other comments, you are still not taking into account that any race that can explore the galaxy, has FTL travel and FTL communications has means of Extreme power generation Must have unimaginable ways to wage war. and with the eve galaxy the 4 races are so close to each other of corce they would put their main focus into producing advanced weapons. people dont seem the grasp the fact of them being 8000 years more advanced then us. Look back 100 years and then tell me that technological advancement doesn't happen on a exponential scale. With the comment to the face that modern firearms still use the same basic principle as they did hundreds of years ago, its only been hundreds of years not 8000 like eve and we still use such weapons because they are effective to our targets IE people not giant flying city's. Take a better look at history - from the start of recorded history to around 1000A.D. technology was almost at a stand still. Somewhere people invented the wheel, swords, bows and arrows, and boats and then nothing changed for millenniums. They invented new materials (stone to bronze to iron...) but the weapons stayed fairly similar, the transportation basically was still all horse. Then suddenly things started to change, it was slow at first and then exponential so if you take a small portion of our history (only 100 years) ya everything changes greatly . But who's to say that we won't plateau or something. Since the invention of the cartridge guns have basically been about the same for the last 100 years. We have longer ranges, faster shooters but they all follow the same principle. Where are the rail guns, laser, flying cars, all the stuff we should have that we have been dreaming of for the last 100 years. It seems we have hit a wall. I have no problem with the tech they have for us in the game. ... Beat the dead horse
Nardman	Posted - 2010.08.02 02:46:00 - [32] Since when is anything in EvE realistic? THIS IS DOMINION!
Drakkan Koran	Posted - 2010.08.02 02:50:00 - [33] Originally by: plastastic If i remember right the back story explains this away by saying the guns they let you use are the civilian versions of the guns the ones used by the real navy's are alot bigger. This. All those weapons the OP thinks he should be able to play with belong to CONCORD.
Ghaylenty	Posted - 2010.08.02 03:35:00 - [34] hell, lets get rid of the idea of guns, theyre primitive in their own right. its far more likely that this far in the future our brains will have evolved to allow manipulation of matter through force of will. im sure by this time pyrokinesis will be a popular method of destruction. i can see it now... "buff molecule dematerialization!" i actually fly amarr
stoicfaux	Posted - 2010.08.02 03:43:00 - [35] Originally by: plastastic If i remember right the back story explains this away by saying the guns they let you use are the civilian versions of the guns the ones used by the real navy's are alot bigger. So what would the a real navy titan's doomsday weapon be capable of? And should all that Caldari Navy equipment be renamed to Caldari Navy Civilian equipment? When it comes to basic ship and weapon technology, the back stories fail often. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.08.02 03:49:00 - [36] Originally by: Karak Terrel Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Much like evolution, technology has no set direction or timescale. But evolution and technology both have exponential growth which is also called the law of accelerating returns. We are only a few decades away from really drastic changes. I don't know how long this is in the discussion now, but if you think about it, it really destroys most of the science fiction scenarios we have today. In my perception Eve is a combination of "todays humanity" with advanced technology but without some of the consequences of the technology. Fantasy games do the same thing all the time but back in time. They take "todays humanity" and build some fancy magic creatures around it. I think a game that reflects the reality for both genres, science fiction and fantasy would be really absurd. - Only batteries can prevent the singularity Actually, no they don't. Evolution is a response which, because it is based on the chemistry of a molecule, will reach equilibrium until that state is disturbed. And nothing special is happening in 2012 either, get over it. Originally by: Dr Reinhold Eve is the endgame. Every other game you have played has just been preparation for this.
Boris Varshavsky Caldari New Eden Regimental Navy	Posted - 2010.08.02 04:01:00 - [37] It took humans 1891 years FROM today just to invent WARP TECHNOLOGY; fitting that technology to ships took another 533 years. That is an insane amount of time. AND this was during the first time around. After the EVE gate collapse, the Jovians passed that technology onto the other four races. Also, don't forget that tritanium, the main mineral in all ships in EVE, reacts explosively to Earth's atmosphere. Therefore, applying any of Earth's reactive properties that we humans have so far discovered is useless, such as "antimatter" being completely devastating to anything that it touches, is irrational without any dev fact stated. TLDR It's a scifi game, and you are taking it too far with the "scifi" part. Inb4 rage
stoicfaux	Posted - 2010.08.02 04:25:00 - [38] Originally by: Boris Varshavsky TLDR It's a scifi game, and you are taking it too far with the "scifi" part. Meh. Normally science fiction at least tries to be somewhat "realistic" or at least internally consistent with its physics. Eve ship and weapons tech reminds me too much of scifi buzzword bingo, i.e. they just sprinkle scifi words around instead of using a bit of logic to avoid huge gaping holes in their descriptions. Suspension of disbelief does have limits. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
Lemmy Kravitz	Posted - 2010.08.02 06:08:00 - [39] Originally by: Jack Airron Edited by: Jack Airron on 01/08/2010 09:32:37 Originally by: Estel Arador I guess you missed the memo telling you all civilisation collapsed for thousands of years... Yes, however taking into account he time of eves "dark age" they should still be 8000 years more advanced then us, for example today we have the technology to build a laser that outputs 1000 TW, a mega pulse laser in eve outputs 350ish GIGAwatts its absurd. not to mention drone bandwidth in the megabits range. Far more important things to worry about in this game, rather than sitting here and crying that you want more 0's added to the end of a description cause it is not uber enough.
Frozean	Posted - 2010.08.02 06:19:00 - [40] Why does the technologically advanced eve world has no +0.01 isk machine for automated trades? Why does the technologically advanced eve world has no automatic veldspar mining technology? Why does the technologically advanced eve world has windows on their ships? Why does the technologically advanced eve world still drink dairy products in boxes? Why does the technologically advanced eve world still uses canned food? Why does the technologically advanced eve world still needs to "train skills?" Why does the technologically advanced eve world cannot warp infinitely without stopping (thus avoiding CONCORDE) Why does the technologically advanced eve world...

Kashre Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2010.08.02 07:03:00 - [41] Originally by: stoicfaux Originally by: Boris Varshavsky TLDR It's a scifi game, and you are taking it too far with the "scifi" part. Meh. Normally science fiction at least tries to be somewhat "realistic" or at least internally consistent with its physics. Eve ship and weapons tech reminds me too much of scifi buzzword bingo, i.e. they just sprinkle scifi words around instead of using a bit of logic to avoid huge gaping holes in their descriptions. Suspension of disbelief does have limits. Unless you're talking about Star Wars, visual based Sci-fi (as in shows, movies, etc) don't even pretend to try to stay internally consistent with their physics. Haven't you ever watched star trek? In the end, all that maters is that the game is balance and we have spaceships. :P Don't get too carried away here. +++ "Etiquette is for the Dojo. In war there is only victory or death." - Eiji Yoshikawa
Karak Terrel As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions	Posted - 2010.08.02 11:35:00 - [42] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Actually, no they don't. Evolution is a response which, because it is based on the chemistry of a molecule, will reach equilibrium until that state is disturbed. Evolution is a response? Will reach equilibrium? Where do you get that nonsense from? Hint: Earth is not a closed system, we get constant energy supply from the sun. Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium And nothing special is happening in 2012 either, get over it. At least one thing you got right. -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.08.02 12:55:00 - [43] Edited by: Halcyon Ingenium on 02/08/2010 12:56:47 Originally by: Karak Terrel Evolution is a response? Will reach equilibrium? Where do you get that nonsense from? Textbooks. Originally by: Karak Terrel Hint: Earth is not a closed system, we get constant energy supply from the sun. This is so full of fail its hard to even address without insults. Originally by: Karak Terrel But evolution and technology both have exponential growth Your confusing the meaning of "growth". In the former quote you speak of growth as dependent on energy, like a plant grows. How the **** is exponential growth fueled by a constant supply of energy? Not to mention your confusing two different meanings of the word growth. In the latter quote what you seem to mean by growth is the increased rate of iterations that display increased complexity, which has no relation to the amount of energy we get from the sun directly. Solar energy does influence evolution in the form of mutations due to genetic damage from radiation, but as you already pointed out, the supply of radiation from the sun is constant, and therefore the mutation rate at any given latitude will be pretty much constant across that latitude, and on average constant for the planet. But the way you relate solar energy to the process of descent through modification and natural selection is just stupid. Do you understand what evolution is, how it works, and that it is a response to environment and not a process that need necessarily move ever forward? Or do you think the prevailing myth in modern culture, that of evolution having a teleological outcome, is true? And that by comparison technology, because it iterates with increasing complexity as well, must also have a teleological outcome? If you want to actually learn about evolution, a good place for the layman would be R. Dawkins The Selfish Gene, followed up by The Extended Phenotype. A basic understanding of chemistry would help as well, specifically organic and biochemistry. Until then, please stop confusing enthusiasm for science fiction as a substitute for an education in science. Originally by: Dr Reinhold Eve is the endgame. Every other game you have played has just been preparation for this.
Karak Terrel As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions	Posted - 2010.08.02 15:18:00 - [44] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium BLUB I was obviously juts talking about growth in complexity but not everyone got it. So it is nice for you that you know how the biochemistry works but i was not talking about biochemistry i was talking about information technology and how the increase of complexity accelerates itself. What is the principal of evolution? Natural selection of random mutations. Has that for itself something to do with biochemistry? Of course not! This is a general principal and it is INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY! So if you want to understand evolution and increased complexity, read a book of Kurzweil or Wolfram. If you want to learn something about our ancestors, the diversity of life and how biochemistry works, read Dawkins or something. Evolution is bigger that just biochemistry and Dawkins knows that too (Mem). So please try to get the full picture before you try to talk to grownups next time. Thx -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately.
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.02 20:02:00 - [45] Quote: A Rokh can hit instantly out to 250km. I don't think the round would have time to burn up before hitting the ground. Or maybe you can reduce the power on the guns to avoid burning up the round in the atmosphere. /facepalm What causes burn up is not some kind of imaginary layer of heat that takes time to melt objects its the friction of a object passing trough the partials in our atmosphere at high rates of speed it wouldn't mater how much time it takes it would burn up with out a heat shield.
stoicfaux	Posted - 2010.08.02 20:19:00 - [46] Originally by: Jack Airron Quote: A Rokh can hit instantly out to 250km. I don't think the round would have time to burn up before hitting the ground. Or maybe you can reduce the power on the guns to avoid burning up the round in the atmosphere. /facepalm What causes burn up is not some kind of imaginary layer of heat that takes time to melt objects its the friction of a object passing trough the partials in our atmosphere at high rates of speed it wouldn't mater how much time it takes it would burn up with out a heat shield. Yes, yes. Normally I would agree. But, materials science in Eve is pretty wonky. Plus if the round does burn up, it takes time for the gases/plasma to expand. Given the insanely/extremely high velocity of railgun rounds in Eve, can the round of now expanding gas/plasma hit the ground before it expands into nothingness? I'm thinking shockwave damage. Plus, there's a PI related chronicle where a capsuleer describes what would happen if he fired his railgun's antimatter rounds at a planet's surface. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2010.08.02 21:12:00 - [47] Originally by: Mashie Saldana Originally by: Jack Airron Do eve weapons seem kind of primitive in scifi terms? Not really, we can launch small cars at 250km/s. i talk to a chap on the net who designs arty pieces for a living. latest project was the M777. now i've always thought using projectiles in space combat was dopey for various reasons. i'm not exactly a techy expert in that field so i asked my net buddy if he'd care to estimate the size of a proj gun based on some of the apparent numbers from eve. his best guess making some really nice extrapolations to allow for better tech in building the gun was that it would be a bit over 100 000 tonnes. this is actually quite close to the size of a battleship that in eve carries 7 or 8 of these monster guns. realism is entirely shot and reasonable is just hanging on by it's fingertips in eve.
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.02 21:13:00 - [48] Originally by: stoicfaux Originally by: Jack Airron Quote: A Rokh can hit instantly out to 250km. I don't think the round would have time to burn up before hitting the ground. Or maybe you can reduce the power on the guns to avoid burning up the round in the atmosphere. /facepalm What causes burn up is not some kind of imaginary layer of heat that takes time to melt objects its the friction of a object passing trough the partials in our atmosphere at high rates of speed it wouldn't mater how much time it takes it would burn up with out a heat shield. Yes, yes. Normally I would agree. But, materials science in Eve is pretty wonky. Plus if the round does burn up, it takes time for the gases/plasma to expand. Given the insanely/extremely high velocity of railgun rounds in Eve, can the round of now expanding gas/plasma hit the ground before it expands into nothingness? I'm thinking shockwave damage. Plus, there's a PI related chronicle where a capsuleer describes what would happen if he fired his railgun's antimatter rounds at a planet's surface. I dont know why i even bother with explaining things to you you will never understand. If you fire a rail gun round from space at a a planet the round will burn up over 100 miles above the earths surface any anti matter will detonate above the planet with out causing any harm. now if the Battle ship was close enough to the planet say 2-3 miles above the surface he could do that amount of damage.
Tei Lin	Posted - 2010.08.02 23:37:00 - [49] What about the maximum distance on missiles? Or the Maximum Velocity of ships given little to no resistance to cause a terminal velocity? Or the fact that ships catch on fire? I stay awake at night cause the pixel spaceships don't make sense!!!!!!!
Vaneshi SnowCrash	Posted - 2010.08.03 04:38:00 - [50] Originally by: Frozean Why does the technologically advanced eve world has no automatic veldspar mining technology? Who's to say it doesn't? I mean all those NPC's had to be getting the minerals to make stuff from somewhere right? Originally by: Frozean Why does the technologically advanced eve world has windows on their ships? Because the human crew likes to look out of them when off duty. They're probably empty during battle with the airlocks secured and the atmosphere removed. They might even have armoured shutters over any that are near vital parts. You just don't see the shutters. It's like you don't see the point defence system on your battleship firing like crazy... but you know it's there.

Culmen Caldari Blood Phage Syndicate Dead Terrorists	Posted - 2010.08.03 05:39:00 - [51] Edited by: Culmen on 03/08/2010 05:43:01 Edited by: Culmen on 03/08/2010 05:42:02 Originally by: Jack Airron I dont know why i even bother with explaining things to you you will never understand. If you fire a rail gun round from space at a a planet the round will burn up over 100 miles above the earths surface any anti matter will detonate above the planet with out causing any harm. now if the Battle ship was close enough to the planet say 2-3 miles above the surface he could do that amount of damage. You my friend, are the one who fails to understand. First a quick lesson about the earth's atmosphere An object "100 miles"(~160km) above the earth is a decent way into the thermosphere, but most objects start burning up around 85km. An object flying a mile or two above the earth is already below cruising altitude of some commercial aircraft, so there's going to be negligible atmosphere burn. Finally, there's an online calculator designed for predicting the effects of meteor strikes. Courtesy of Imperial College (UK) I plugged in the stats for a 1400mm cannon firing depleted uranium L. I assume a spherical ball of depleted uranium hitting sedimentary rock at 250km/s at a 90 degree angle. BTW depleted uranium has a density of 19,100 kg/m3. Results are summarized as: The shot hit the earth intact. It hits with the force of a small atomic bomb (~200 kilotons TNT equiv). It creates a hole in the ground about 440 meters in diameter. The over pressure blast wave can down multi story buildings at a kilometer away and cause second degree burns at that distance. and further more why do i even need a sig?
Tychus	Posted - 2010.08.03 05:40:00 - [52] Edited by: Tychus on 03/08/2010 05:41:12 OP: You sir, are likely correct. However. With the use of FTL kinetics, "grey goo" nano swarms, Von Neumann "berserkers", John Carpenter's "thing in a UPS box", antimatter, singularity projectors and "Dr. Devices", Eve lasted 3 and 1/2 minutes. Enjoy your brief stay... T
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.03 06:17:00 - [53] Originally by: Culmen Edited by: Culmen on 03/08/2010 05:43:01 Edited by: Culmen on 03/08/2010 05:42:02 Originally by: Jack Airron I dont know why i even bother with explaining things to you you will never understand. If you fire a rail gun round from space at a a planet the round will burn up over 100 miles above the earths surface any anti matter will detonate above the planet with out causing any harm. now if the Battle ship was close enough to the planet say 2-3 miles above the surface he could do that amount of damage. You my friend, are the one who fails to understand. First a quick lesson about the earth's atmosphere An object "100 miles"(~160km) above the earth is a decent way into the thermosphere, but most objects start burning up around 85km. An object flying a mile or two above the earth is already below cruising altitude of some commercial aircraft, so there's going to be negligible atmosphere burn. Finally, there's an online calculator designed for predicting the effects of meteor strikes. Courtesy of Imperial College (UK) I plugged in the stats for a 1400mm cannon firing depleted uranium L. I assume a spherical ball of depleted uranium hitting sedimentary rock at 250km/s at a 90 degree angle. BTW depleted uranium has a density of 19,100 kg/m3. Results are summarized as: The shot hit the earth intact. It hits with the force of a small atomic bomb (~200 kilotons TNT equiv). It creates a hole in the ground about 440 meters in diameter. The over pressure blast wave can down multi story buildings at a kilometer away and cause second degree burns at that distance. Reread the ****ing post for the love of god your reading comprehension is in the gutter, I was the one that said if you fire at 2 miles above the surface of the planet it would impact and not burn IT WOULD IMPACT AND NOT BURN UP, Think you got it now buddy? Im not talking about how much damage they do im talking about how primitive they are when compared with any other scfy TV show now before you post culmen make sure you R-E-A-D the words and not just skim.
Culmen Caldari Blood Phage Syndicate Dead Terrorists	Posted - 2010.08.03 06:25:00 - [54] Originally by: Jack Airron Reread the ****ing post for the love of god your reading comprehension is in the gutter, I was the one that said if you fire at 2 miles above the surface of the planet it would impact and not burn IT WOULD IMPACT AND NOT BURN UP, Think you got it now buddy? Im not talking about how much damage they do im talking about how primitive they are when compared with any other scfy TV show now before you post culmen make sure you R-E-A-D the words and not just skim. Sigh I was pointing out that a mile or two is laughably low altitude and thus pointless. You might as well have said a ship hovering two feet off the ground. You are also still WAAAAAY wrong on the burn up altitude. Re-read the post for why. And the point of half the thread is. Who needs high tech when you got a 16 nuke cannons on every ship. Plus almost all other sci-fi weapons more advanced then eve seems to work on "magic", like star destroyers pulling stunts that show they are using energy density higher then anti matter, with no explination. and further more why do i even need a sig?
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.03 06:31:00 - [55] Originally by: Culmen Originally by: Jack Airron Reread the ****ing post for the love of god your reading comprehension is in the gutter, I was the one that said if you fire at 2 miles above the surface of the planet it would impact and not burn IT WOULD IMPACT AND NOT BURN UP, Think you got it now buddy? Im not talking about how much damage they do im talking about how primitive they are when compared with any other scfy TV show now before you post culmen make sure you R-E-A-D the words and not just skim. Sigh I was pointing out that a mile or two is laughably low altitude and thus pointless. You might as well have said a ship hovering two feet off the ground. You are also still WAAAAAY wrong on the burn up altitude. Re-read the post for why. And the point of half the thread is. Who needs high tech when you got a 16 nuke cannons on every ship. Plus almost all other sci-fi weapons more advanced then eve seems to work on "magic", like star destroyers pulling stunts that show they are using energy density higher then anti matter, with no explination. You dont seem to understand what friction or acceleration of gravity is.
Steaveus The Scope	Posted - 2010.08.03 07:46:00 - [56] Edited by: Steaveus on 03/08/2010 07:52:43 double post
Steaveus The Scope	Posted - 2010.08.03 07:52:00 - [57] Edited by: Steaveus on 03/08/2010 07:54:04 Originally by: Jack Airron You dont seem to understand what friction or acceleration of gravity is. But you are still not geting what the post is about so ill spellit out for you IT.....IS....ABOUT.....HOW....PRIMITIVE.......EVE........IS........ WHEN..............COMPARED............... TO........... OTHER..................SCIFI. saying "blah blah who needs 16 nukes BLAH BLAH" is stupid when other scify series can annihilate a planet with one shot from a super-space gun. First: I think you mean acceleration due to gravity, not "of" Second: Your responses so far have been nothing short of, "I'm right you're wrong and that you dont agree with me makes you a terrible person" This wouldn't be so bad, except you're wrong. Third: That petawatt laser you mention has a pulse time of 10^-9 seconds. If we take the eve laser animation as an accurate depiction of their pulse time, I'm pretty sure any sane person would concede that they are releasing an ungodly amount of energy. Fourth: Antimatter, do I really even need to argue this? Do you know what antimatter even is and what happens when it comes in contact with matter? Or what about how this complicates firing it through a canon MADE OF MATTER Fifth: Ships bounce off each other due to shields maybe? Sixth: Internet pixel space ships game Anything else?
Bagrista	Posted - 2010.08.03 09:25:00 - [58] Originally by: Drakkan Koran Originally by: plastastic If i remember right the back story explains this away by saying the guns they let you use are the civilian versions of the guns the ones used by the real navy's are alot bigger. This. All those weapons the OP thinks he should be able to play with belong to CONCORD. So, wait. My Caldari Navy Cruises are civilian? And what is the civilian gatling autocannon and other rookie weapons? Children's toys? This is my annoying sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.03 11:15:00 - [59] Originally by: Steaveus Edited by: Steaveus on 03/08/2010 07:54:04 Originally by: Jack Airron You dont seem to understand what friction or acceleration of gravity is. But you are still not geting what the post is about so ill spellit out for you IT.....IS....ABOUT.....HOW....PRIMITIVE.......EVE........IS........ WHEN..............COMPARED............... TO........... OTHER..................SCIFI. saying "blah blah who needs 16 nukes BLAH BLAH" is stupid when other scify series can annihilate a planet with one shot from a super-space gun. First: I think you mean acceleration due to gravity, not "of" Second: Your responses so far have been nothing short of, "I'm right you're wrong and that you dont agree with me makes you a terrible person" This wouldn't be so bad, except you're wrong. Third: That petawatt laser you mention has a pulse time of 10^-9 seconds. If we take the eve laser animation as an accurate depiction of their pulse time, I'm pretty sure any sane person would concede that they are releasing an ungodly amount of energy. Fourth: Antimatter, do I really even need to argue this? Do you know what antimatter even is and what happens when it comes in contact with matter? Or what about how this complicates firing it through a canon MADE OF MATTER Fifth: Ships bounce off each other due to shields maybe? Sixth: Internet pixel space ships game Anything else? First its acceleration of gravity it can be called the second one but doing so is just silly seeing how its officially acceleration of gravity. Second, get your facts right first before you condescend others. Forth . When Anti matter comes into contact with matter protons and anti protons Thus releasing a massive amount of energy If the Races in EVE can design shields they can design a containment vessel that will survive being accelerated by the Railgun. Third Petawatts is 9^15th power giga watts is 9^9th Is it more powerful SURE but should a race that has explored and colonized the milky way galaxy be able to fire Petawatt lasers instead of gigawatt lasers? tank about it and come back to me.
Apocrit Vespulus Moderate Inconvenience	Posted - 2010.08.03 11:33:00 - [60] It's because Kinetic Weapons Are Just Better

Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.03 11:40:00 - [61] Edited by: Jack Airron on 03/08/2010 11:47:10 Originally by: Apocrit Vespulus It's because Kinetic Weapons Are Just Better Lasers are just horridly over used in scifi Plasma and anti proton weapons would be the way to go. Quote: Far more important things to worry about in this game, rather than sitting here and crying that you want more 0's added to the end of a description cause it is not uber enough. you might not be able to multi-task but others can.
heheheh PedoHamma	Posted - 2010.08.03 11:49:00 - [62] WHen you have actually been through the EVE gate and have seen what its like there, then i will listen :P
FalconWings	Posted - 2010.08.03 12:08:00 - [63] Space weapons as portrayed in popular Sci-Fi are always nowhere near realistic. The most simple method of ending a war would be: -> Accelerate some piece of rock with help of a great mass (Star, Block Hole, whatever...) to 0.99c. -> Kick it out of its orbit to interfere with the enemys planet orbit. -> look at an impact with an energy of E=0.5 mv^2 (Which is quite a lot if you just take a very conservative mass of 10^8 kg) -> chances of defending against it near zero other than being the first to hit. Your best bet would be to do it before you even established contact because the other side may do it. So I guess EvE WEapons are okay with me.
Paeniteo Ministry of War	Posted - 2010.08.03 15:25:00 - [64] Originally by: FalconWings Space weapons as portrayed in popular Sci-Fi are always nowhere near realistic. The most simple method of ending a war would be: -> Accelerate some piece of rock with help of a great mass (Star, Block Hole, whatever...) to 0.99c. -> Kick it out of its orbit to interfere with the enemys planet orbit. -> look at an impact with an energy of E=0.5 mv^2 (Which is quite a lot if you just take a very conservative mass of 10^8 kg) -> chances of defending against it near zero other than being the first to hit. Your best bet would be to do it before you even established contact because the other side may do it. So I guess EvE WEapons are okay with me. That pretty much sums it up. If you start using real physics the need for some technology is reduced. Accelerate a rock to 0.999999999c and whatever it's aimed at is toast. Guns, nuclear bombs and missiles as we know them will be completely redundant. Magnetic fields and synthetic armors won't protect you anymore. Forget the shiny hull, pilot interface and the art student design, it would much more likely be an autopilot computer flying an asteroid. And you thought the Domi was ugly! There are a lot of things in EVE which make less sense than the weapons; EVE's physics are completely whacked out all-round. I personally prefer it that way; real physics would make for a very short lived and dull game.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.08.03 15:31:00 - [65] Originally by: Karak Terrel Natural selection of random mutations. Has that for itself something to do with biochemistry? Of course not! /facepalm I've read Kurzweil, you don't know what teleological means, and why it is a logical fallacy, do you. Forget it believe what you want. Originally by: Dr Reinhold Eve is the endgame. Every other game you have played has just been preparation for this.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.08.03 15:35:00 - [66] Originally by: Jack Airron Copy and paste from WIKI more. i was talking about technology NOT biological entity maby one day you will evolve to a point of reading posts before you copy and paste. That's right, everyone with knowledge these days who doesn't agree with you just copies and pastes from wiki. Evolution is evolution, a general priciple not subsumed by biology. Whatever, you and Karak can sit around sucking each others **s waiting for the singularity to deliver everything on a silver platter for you, enjoy the wait. Originally by:** Dr Reinhold Eve is the endgame. Every other game you have played has just been preparation for this.
SoulBlythe Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.	Posted - 2010.08.03 16:00:00 - [67] I think you are missing the greatest point of Science Fiction.... It's FICTION, make-believe, from the imagination. Yes, there is realistic fiction but it's still a story created by an imagination. The best part about science fiction is it can be anything. it can have some realism but at the same time it can be steampunk or mystical or whatever mix of science and fiction you want. Just because you can have innovation in science or technology does not mean you have to do it. Now since you mentioned TV Shows/movies lets look at some: Firefly Starship Troopers Farscape Babylon 5 Stargate Series Battlestar Gallactica So just let it be, this is thier story we play in. Don't like it? Can I have your stuff? ======================
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2010.08.03 16:28:00 - [68] Originally by: DuKackBoon By the way, don't tell me firing concentrated beams of Tachyons isn't sci-fi enough. At least, there's enough fiction, because Tachyons don't exist. Also don't tell me firing extreme quantities of Antimatter (Aurora Ominae) isn't very ****ing advanced. hate to break it to you but tachyons are real. no idea why anyone would go to the trouble of firing a beam of them at anything though as they would just pass through whatever it was without interacting with ie damaging it. it's not that firing antimatter is all that hard what's impressive is having enough antimatter to fire at someone. stuff's quite expensive to generate.
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2010.08.03 16:38:00 - [69] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Edited by: Halcyon Ingenium on 02/08/2010 12:56:47 Originally by: Karak Terrel Evolution is a response? Will reach equilibrium? Where do you get that nonsense from? Textbooks. Originally by: Karak Terrel Hint: Earth is not a closed system, we get constant energy supply from the sun. This is so full of fail its hard to even address without insults. Originally by: Karak Terrel our planet not only has an outside energy source aka the sun but it picks up about a kiloton of mass each day by sweeping dust and crap from space. it is not a closed system in any real way.
Sig Sour	Posted - 2010.08.03 16:40:00 - [70] Sorry to break all your hearts, but Type One and greater civilizations are non-violent, it is sorta part of becoming a Type One. There is no such thing as space wars.

FalconWings	Posted - 2010.08.03 16:41:00 - [71] Edited by: FalconWings on 03/08/2010 16:44:43 Originally by: Ehranavaar Originally by: DuKackBoon By the way, don't tell me firing concentrated beams of Tachyons isn't sci-fi enough. At least, there's enough fiction, because Tachyons don't exist. Also don't tell me firing extreme quantities of Antimatter (Aurora Ominae) isn't very ****ing advanced. hate to break it to you but tachyons are real. no idea why anyone would go to the trouble of firing a beam of them at anything though as they would just pass through whatever it was without interacting with ie damaging it. it's not that firing antimatter is all that hard what's impressive is having enough antimatter to fire at someone. stuff's quite expensive to generate. You are half-wrong Tachyons may or may not exist they are after all pure hypothetical, though on the other part you are right. Even if they would exist they would still follow causality which leads to the point that no ftl information transmission(don't know is it the right word? english is not my mother tongue) is possible.
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2010.08.03 16:59:00 - [72] if tachyons aren't real what are they measuring way down in that mine in ontario? they have a big tank of heavy water borrowed from aecl thousands of feet down in the mine to observe tachyon interactions. they are getting hits on the detectors that are impossible to be anything but tachyons interacting with the heavy water.
Leon Mustapha Amarr Kart Kan Industries Raikiri Assasins	Posted - 2010.08.03 17:17:00 - [73] Originally by: Karak Terrel Evolution is a response? Will reach equilibrium? Where do you get that nonsense from? Yes, evolution is a response. An enviroment changes, applying different (in type or magnitude) selective pressures. Selective pressure is what drives natural selection, which in turn drives adaption (evolution). The point of adaption is basically to make an organism use as little energy as possible in relation to how many offspring it generates. Therefore evolution drives the adaptation of organisms to reach an equilibruim with its environment. Sharks haven't changed for millions of years because they are at an equllibrium with their environment, which as far as a shark is concerned also hasn't really changed for millions of years. Originally by: Karak Terrel Natural selection of random mutations. Has that for itself something to do with biochemistry? Of course not! Actually evolution is entirely to do with biochemistry. For a species to evolve, a beneficial mutation must be passed on to it's offspring, therefore it must be contained in its parents DNA. Whilst DNA is the mechanism life uses to store information, it is itself a biochemical molecule subject to the laws of biochemistry. Given that the structure of the DNA molecule influences the information it stores and that the structure of DNA is influenced by biochemistry, you can only conclude that biochemical laws govern how that information is utilised and manipulated. Furthermore, the functional information that DNA stores is all about other biochemical molecules, both their structure and the mechanisms to control when they should be produced and in what quantity. So even the environment that the information effects is biochemical. Of course that's all irrelvant, because the massive glaring hole in your "full picture" is that biological evolution operates on a random basis. The development of technology via research is not random, it depends upon the formation and refinement of theories to control the direction of said research to achieve a desired outcome. On a fundamental level biological and techological evolution work differently. Biological evolution is the gradual accumulation of randomly generated beneficial traits, leading to an optimal with an enviroment. Where as techological evolution is driven by factors not restricted to proliferation, and is directed and planned towards a known goal. Additionally the pressures which drive research don't stop when something has been optimised. There's a conscious human need for continual advancement. Therefore, without an exponential change in enviroment, bioloical evolution cannot be exponential. If you did manage to arrange an environemnt which changed exponentially, and some how made it so that life could exist in such a rapidly changing environment you'd reach a hard limit on how fast an organism can evolve due to the speed at which the biochemical reactions which control life operate, you can only grow so fast. With a rate limiting factor like that in a system, you can never reach an exponetial state.
Dian'h Might Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated	Posted - 2010.08.03 18:00:00 - [74] Originally by: stoicfaux Eve rail guns can fire lead which isn't magnetic. The projectile in a railgun doesn't need to be magnetic, just conductive. On top of that the nature of a railgun requires a square barrel, so any projectile launched would most likely be encased in a sabot (unless its a space gun in which case the shape doesn't matter so much). [qupte=Jack Airron]What causes burn up is not some kind of imaginary layer of heat that takes time to melt objects its the friction of a object passing trough the partials in our atmosphere at high rates of speed it wouldn't mater how much time it takes it would burn up with out a heat shield. If the exposure is short enough the heat generated from the friction won't have enough time to do any significant damage to the projectile (assuming something metallic). - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac"
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.03 19:43:00 - [75] Edited by: Jack Airron on 03/08/2010 19:43:11 Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Originally by: Jack Airron Copy and paste from WIKI more. i was talking about technology NOT biological entity maby one day you will evolve to a point of reading posts before you copy and paste. That's right, everyone with knowledge these days who doesn't agree with you just copies and pastes from wiki. Evolution is evolution, a general priciple not subsumed by biology. Whatever, you and Karak can sit around sucking each others ****s waiting for the singularity to deliver everything on a silver platter for you, enjoy the wait. Thats all well and dandy cupcake but when you start bringing biologic evolution terms into a technological evolution thread im going to call you on it. now you seem mad, can i have your stuff. For evey one else, i guess i have to say this for a 6th time i hope you read it this time, this thread has noting to do with realism it has to do with eve weapons VS other scifi weapons. Nor does it have to deal with he exponential evolution of biological entity's so read the posts before you comment i dont want to have to repeat this for a 12 time.
Doddy The Executives IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.08.03 22:07:00 - [76] Originally by: Jack Airron Originally by: Estel Arador Originally by: Jack Airron Yes, however taking into account he time of eves "dark age" they should still be 8000 years more advanced then us According to the timeline the first modern civilisation emerged barely 7000 years ago. How they could be "8000 years more advanced than us" is beyond me. Don't forget you have to subtract the age of our civilisation from the 7000 years the Caldari existed. What age would you put on our civilisation? our civilization is about 10000 years what you are not taking into account is the difference of human civilization and EVE civilization for instance no where in eve lore does it say they had a 1000 year black out in their technological evolution like we did thanks to religion and the dark ages. And you are assuming technology evolves on a liner scale when in reality it evolves exponentially with the first great discovery powering the next and the next and the next. (IE modern day computing) These points are all moot though because we have the technology now to do what eve weapons are doing. minus maby blasters. The amarr are still in a religeous dark age, the minmatr in a tribal one. as for technological advancement how easy would it be to develop nuclear physics on a planet with no fissile material, or industrial revoloution on a planet with no fossil fuels? Time has no bearing on technological advancement whatsoever (it can go backwards after all), that is purely down to socio-economic factors and available resources. For all you know we are living in our species golden age and we will never advance as fast again. A couple of plague epidemics, volcanic eruptions, accidental deaths and the different outcome in a couple of battles and we might still all be hiting each other over the head with sticks.
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.03 22:45:00 - [77] Originally by: Doddy Originally by: Jack Airron Originally by: Estel Arador Originally by: Jack Airron Yes, however taking into account he time of eves "dark age" they should still be 8000 years more advanced then us According to the timeline the first modern civilisation emerged barely 7000 years ago. How they could be "8000 years more advanced than us" is beyond me. Don't forget you have to subtract the age of our civilisation from the 7000 years the Caldari existed. What age would you put on our civilisation? our civilization is about 10000 years what you are not taking into account is the difference of human civilization and EVE civilization for instance no where in eve lore does it say they had a 1000 year black out in their technological evolution like we did thanks to religion and the dark ages. And you are assuming technology evolves on a liner scale when in reality it evolves exponentially with the first great discovery powering the next and the next and the next. (IE modern day computing) These points are all moot though because we have the technology now to do what eve weapons are doing. minus maby blasters. The amarr are still in a religeous dark age, the minmatr in a tribal one. as for technological advancement how easy would it be to develop nuclear physics on a planet with no fissile material, or industrial revoloution on a planet with no fossil fuels? Time has no bearing on technological advancement whatsoever (it can go backwards after all), that is purely down to socio-economic factors and available resources. For all you know we are living in our species golden age and we will never advance as fast again. A couple of plague epidemics, volcanic eruptions, accidental deaths and the different outcome in a couple of battles and we might still all be hiting each other over the head with sticks. having a planet with out fissionable metarals is almost imposable, and no fossil fuels? do you even know where fossil fuels come from? ill give you a hint "FOSSIL" I can grantee you that Our technological advancement is about to expand at the speed of light give it a few years and aging will be a thing of the past as will fossil fuels and world hunger. to give you a clue about how much things have changed, i have more power in my cellphone then all the Apollo missions computing power put together.
Karak Terrel As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions	Posted - 2010.08.03 23:22:00 - [78] Originally by: Leon Mustapha Yet another lesson about biochemistry Again, i did not talk about biochemistry or genetics. This is more general. Even in biology you find the same principal again and again. Chemical evolution, evolution of the DNA, evolution of the brain.. You don't find exponential change in DNA itself today you probably find exponential change in DNA back in the days when DNA itself evolved. And this has nothing to do with teleology, there is no intention or whatever. It is simple and stupid computing and iterating on gained advantages. AGAIN IT IS SIMPLE AND STUPID FECKING COMPUTING! Get it now? People like Halcyon think it is ok to go around and stick a fairytale sticker on each idea the don't understand so they don't really have to argue against. Originally by: Leon Mustapha On a fundamental level biological and techological evolution work differently. Biological evolution is the gradual accumulation of randomly generated beneficial traits, leading to an optimal with an enviroment. Where as techological evolution is driven by factors not restricted to proliferation, and is directed and planned towards a known goal. Additionally the pressures which drive research don't stop when something has been optimised. There's a conscious human need for continual advancement. Ok, for example the evolution of Unix operating systems (this does not contain different distributions): The Unix family tree That looks really like it was planed doesn't it? The exponential thing here is that with every iteration of the operating system it gets more complex but the provided interfaces are more abstract, so the ideal programmer which works always at the same speed is now actually faster in for example coding the next layer of abstraction which accelerates it work again... and so forth. It is possible to plan some amounts of abstraction and implement them in one shot, but this systems never survived (Plan9, Hurd..) they did not grow in the actual environment. And what the heck is "The Goal" here? Same story with conventional tools, and invention does stop if an optimum is reached. There where few inventions on scissors lately. Same story with biology -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately.
Jhagiti Tyran Invicta.	Posted - 2010.08.04 00:28:00 - [79] Originally by: Winters Chill Originally by: okst666 The explosions / impact do not fit as well. When I see the impact of my 6 x 425mm on a Cruiser...it could easily blast London off the map, but no...34 damage dealt... :/ And I am not even talking about the torp-explosion. nah, 425mm cannons would do alot of damage but they would not level a city not without prolonged bombardment. If EVEs fictional technology matched the destructive power of the weapons description they should be more than capable of flattening an area much greater than a city probably an area more like a continent in a few minutes, this is a video is of a prototype artillery round with a nuclear fission based warhead back in 1953 this pretty much shows how underpowered the depiction of the weaponry in EVE is if a 280mm cannon firing a single fission shell can do that imagine what six larger calibre cannons spitting out a fusion warhead every two seconds would do.
Culmen Caldari Blood Phage Syndicate Dead Terrorists	Posted - 2010.08.04 01:14:00 - [80] Edited by: Culmen on 04/08/2010 01:15:33 Originally by: Jack Airron You dont seem to understand what friction or acceleration of gravity is. But you are still not geting what the post is about so ill spellit out for you IT.....IS....ABOUT.....HOW....PRIMITIVE.......EVE........IS........ WHEN..............COMPARED............... TO........... OTHER..................SCIFI. saying "blah blah who needs 16 nukes BLAH BLAH" is stupid when other scify series can annihilate a planet with one shot from a super-space gun. And you seriously need to retake some science classes. Lets start with ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE. A slug travelling at 250km/s will guess what, cross 250 km in one second. Acceleration due to gravity at sea level is 9.81 m/s2. So the total added speed to a projectile on that 1 second journey is 9.81m/s or 0.003924% of existing speed. Lets then proceed to CONSERVATION OF MOMENTUM. The energy of an object in motion does not magically disappear in atmosphere, it accelerates air molecules THROUGH FRICTION. See the Tunguska Event for what happens then. Star Wars is roughly the most magical I'm willing to let a sci-fi series get. And their average ship did not carry a planet buster. Only the death star and some of the larger super stardestroyers had super-lasers. Ditto with Star Trek, BSG, and almost all the sci-fi films I've come across. Really the only series with mass deployed planet busters were Starship Troopers and The Culture. Now the Titan's have Doomsday devices, Prime Fiction says they are planet killers. That puts us slightly below Star Wars. Plus do you realize the energy requirement to even accelerate a 1400mm slug of depleted uranium to 250km/s. Finally, what exactly is high tech for you anyways? and further more why do i even need a sig?

Dian'h Might Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated	Posted - 2010.08.04 01:21:00 - [81] Originally by: Culmen Plus do you realize the energy requirement to even accelerate a 1400mm slug of depleted uranium to 250km/s. Considering that the titans can travel faster than the speed of light (~300,000km/s), it should be trivial to accelerate a 1400mm slug to that speed. - - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac"
tribalfreak	Posted - 2010.08.04 02:09:00 - [82] Originally by: Drakkan Koran Originally by: plastastic If i remember right the back story explains this away by saying the guns they let you use are the civilian versions of the guns the ones used by the real navy's are alot bigger. This. All those weapons the OP thinks he should be able to play with belong to CONCORD. don't forget the jove ships that can tank entire fleets like theirs are what the op lookin for:P
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.04 04:03:00 - [83] Edited by: Jack Airron on 04/08/2010 04:04:28 Originally by: Culmen Edited by: Culmen on 04/08/2010 01:15:33 Originally by: Jack Airron You dont seem to understand what friction or acceleration of gravity is. But you are still not geting what the post is about so ill spellit out for you IT.....IS....ABOUT.....HOW....PRIMITIVE.......EVE........IS........ WHEN..............COMPARED............... TO........... OTHER..................SCIFI. saying "blah blah who needs 16 nukes BLAH BLAH" is stupid when other scify series can annihilate a planet with one shot from a super-space gun. And you seriously need to retake some science classes. Lets start with ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE. A slug travelling at 250km/s will guess what, cross 250 km in one second. Acceleration due to gravity at sea level is 9.81 m/s2. So the total added speed to a projectile on that 1 second journey is 9.81m/s or 0.003924% of existing speed. Lets then proceed to CONSERVATION OF MOMENTUM. The energy of an object in motion does not magically disappear in atmosphere, it accelerates air molecules THROUGH FRICTION. See the Tunguska Event for what happens then. Star Wars is roughly the most magical I'm willing to let a sci-fi series get. And their average ship did not carry a planet buster. Only the death star and some of the larger super stardestroyers had super-lasers. Ditto with Star Trek, BSG, and almost all the sci-fi films I've come across. Really the only series with mass deployed planet busters were Starship Troopers and The Culture. Now the Titan's have Doomsday devices, Prime Fiction says they are planet killers. That puts us slightly below Star Wars. Plus do you realize the energy requirement to even accelerate a 1400mm slug of depleted uranium to 250km/s. Finally, what exactly is high tech for you anyways? There is no point in talking to someone as stupid as you, you seem to be even more stubborn then a Republican. The heat of a rail gun round passing trough the upper atmosphere would burn it up, you seep to thank that speed will allow it to pass trough unscathed but the speed only worsens the amount of heat being applied to the rail gun round. Take a look at burt rutan's shuttle, it has no need for ablative heat armor because of the amount of drag. What do i find advanced? google Stargate Atlantis plasma beam weapons. Like someone above me said, we have ships that travle at faster then light speeds, i doubt that any one would blink a eye at accelerating a 1400mm round to that speed
Culmen Caldari Blood Phage Syndicate Dead Terrorists	Posted - 2010.08.04 04:39:00 - [84] Originally by: Jack Airron There is no point in talking to someone as stupid as you, you seem to be even more stubborn then a Republican. The heat of a rail gun round passing trough the upper atmosphere would burn it up, you seep to thank that speed will allow it to pass trough unscathed but the speed only worsens the amount of heat being applied to the rail gun round. Take a look at burt rutan's shuttle, it has no need for ablative heat armor because of the amount of drag. What do i find advanced? google Stargate Atlantis plasma beam weapons. Like someone above me said, we have ships that travle at faster then light speeds, i doubt that any one would blink a eye at accelerating a 1400mm round to that speed. Just because you dont thank something is scifi doesn't mean its not scifi, you seem quite full of your self. LOL, then why are you still talking. A list of things you haven't refuted other then holding your hands to your ears and yelling is. 1)Energy transfer from projectile to atmosphere Doesn't matter if the projectile burned up, it will still impart it's energy. In fact the "burning up" is what is doing the damage. Show me an adequate explanation on where the energy dissipates to, and I'll withdraw this point 2) A single calculation that shows that a dense metal will "Burn up completely" in the atmosphere. Seriously, I brought math from Imperial College that showed the dense metal would hit intact, you brought an anecdote of a man craft that survived a SUB-ORBITAL FLIGHT. Finally you're Asgard Plasma Weapon isn't all that advanced, or at least much more advanced then saaaay, the Gallente DD, both work on simple principles, channel particles, except the Gallente one uses anti-matter. There also no word on exactly how much energy it's putting out, or references to how effective it is against anything other then an SGA ship and further more why do i even need a sig?
Jack Airron Gallente Wrecking Shots -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.08.04 06:20:00 - [85] Originally by: Culmen Originally by: Jack Airron There is no point in talking to someone as stupid as you, you seem to be even more stubborn then a Republican. The heat of a rail gun round passing trough the upper atmosphere would burn it up, you seep to thank that speed will allow it to pass trough unscathed but the speed only worsens the amount of heat being applied to the rail gun round. Take a look at burt rutan's shuttle, it has no need for ablative heat armor because of the amount of drag. What do i find advanced? google Stargate Atlantis plasma beam weapons. Like someone above me said, we have ships that travle at faster then light speeds, i doubt that any one would blink a eye at accelerating a 1400mm round to that speed. Just because you dont thank something is scifi doesn't mean its not scifi, you seem quite full of your self. LOL, then why are you still talking. A list of things you haven't refuted other then holding your hands to your ears and yelling is. 1)Energy transfer from projectile to atmosphere Doesn't matter if the projectile burned up, it will still impart it's energy. In fact the "burning up" is what is doing the damage. Show me an adequate explanation on where the energy dissipates to, and I'll withdraw this point 2) A single calculation that shows that a dense metal will "Burn up completely" in the atmosphere. Seriously, I brought math from Imperial College that showed the dense metal would hit intact, you brought an anecdote of a man craft that survived a SUB-ORBITAL FLIGHT. Finally you're Asgard Plasma Weapon isn't all that advanced, or at least much more advanced then saaaay, the Gallente DD, both work on simple principles, channel particles, except the Gallente one uses anti-matter. There also no word on exactly how much energy it's putting out, or references to how effective it is against anything other then an SGA ship you need to stop posting, you are saying that the objective of planetary bombardment is to have the round burn up in the atmosphere, Thats is so ungodly stupid i dont even know how you could think of it. Second The ori ships where able to withstand hundreds if not thousands of blasts from Gould mother-ships and mark 7-8 naquda enhanced missiles. In the first season of Stargate the gouled bombed earth in a alternate timeline and the east coast was shot at from orbit, carter made a comment about each blast having a yield in megatons at-least. Flash to 9 years later the earth ships and the plasma beam weapons destroyed the same ori ships with only a few shots from the plasma weapons. http://www.classzone.com/books/earth_science/terc/content/investigations/es2506/es2506page08.cfm
okst666	Posted - 2010.08.06 09:40:00 - [86] Originally by: Jhagiti Tyran Originally by: Winters Chill Originally by: okst666 The explosions / impact do not fit as well. When I see the impact of my 6 x 425mm on a Cruiser...it could easily blast London off the map, but no...34 damage dealt... :/ And I am not even talking about the torp-explosion. nah, 425mm cannons would do alot of damage but they would not level a city not without prolonged bombardment. If EVEs fictional technology matched the destructive power of the weapons description they should be more than capable of flattening an area much greater than a city probably an area more like a continent in a few minutes, this is a video is of a prototype artillery round with a nuclear fission based warhead back in 1953 this pretty much shows how underpowered the depiction of the weaponry in EVE is if a 280mm cannon firing a single fission shell can do that imagine what six larger calibre cannons spitting out a fusion warhead every two seconds would do. wow...
Habiestor	Posted - 2010.08.06 10:04:00 - [87] What I find most interesting/disturbing is that they all still speak "old dialect" English.
Dr Sheepbringer Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.06 10:16:00 - [88] I AGREE!! WE NEED PSI-WARFARE!!! So I can melt your brain with my thoughts! Oh, wait..I do that in local! KEEP LOCAL!!! Stop whining.
Monistat Seven Caldari	Posted - 2010.08.06 10:33:00 - [89] Anyone ever think... these guns are the size of battleships and the bullets are the size of frigates? Also... Never argue sci-tech with trekkies. We need a mod of that for eve.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.08.06 10:43:00 - [90] Originally by: Leon Mustapha Originally by: Karak Terrel Evolution is a response? Will reach equilibrium? Where do you get that nonsense from? Yes, evolution is a response. An enviroment changes, applying different (in type or magnitude) selective pressures. Selective pressure is what drives natural selection, which in turn drives adaption (evolution). The point of adaption is basically to make an organism use as little energy as possible in relation to how many offspring it generates. Therefore evolution drives the adaptation of organisms to reach an equilibruim with its environment. Sharks haven't changed for millions of years because they are at an equllibrium with their environment, which as far as a shark is concerned also hasn't really changed for millions of years. Originally by: Karak Terrel Natural selection of random mutations. Has that for itself something to do with biochemistry? Of course not! Actually evolution is entirely to do with biochemistry. For a species to evolve, a beneficial mutation must be passed on to it's offspring, therefore it must be contained in its parents DNA. Whilst DNA is the mechanism life uses to store information, it is itself a biochemical molecule subject to the laws of biochemistry. Given that the structure of the DNA molecule influences the information it stores and that the structure of DNA is influenced by biochemistry, you can only conclude that biochemical laws govern how that information is utilised and manipulated. Furthermore, the functional information that DNA stores is all about other biochemical molecules, both their structure and the mechanisms to control when they should be produced and in what quantity. So even the environment that the information effects is biochemical. Of course that's all irrelvant, because the massive glaring hole in your "full picture" is that biological evolution operates on a random basis. The development of technology via research is not random, it depends upon the formation and refinement of theories to control the direction of said research to achieve a desired outcome. On a fundamental level biological and techological evolution work differently. Biological evolution is the gradual accumulation of randomly generated beneficial traits, leading to an optimal with an enviroment. Where as techological evolution is driven by factors not restricted to proliferation, and is directed and planned towards a known goal. Additionally the pressures which drive research don't stop when something has been optimised. There's a conscious human need for continual advancement. Therefore, without an exponential change in enviroment, bioloical evolution cannot be exponential. If you did manage to arrange an environemnt which changed exponentially, and some how made it so that life could exist in such a rapidly changing environment you'd reach a hard limit on how fast an organism can evolve due to the speed at which the biochemical reactions which control life operate, you can only grow so fast. With a rate limiting factor like that in a system, you can never reach an exponetial state. Yes, thank you for saying what teeth grinding rage prevented me from getting out in a coherent manner. Nevertheless, you're wasting your time on these tards. Originally by: Dr Reinhold Eve is the endgame. Every other game you have played has just been preparation for this.

Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.08.06 10:47:00 - [91] Originally by: Jack Airron now you seem mad, can i have your stuff. That's only relevant as a retort when someone is angry at the game, I mean, **, you are just fail on every level aren't you? Originally by:** Dr Reinhold Eve is the endgame. Every other game you have played has just been preparation for this.
Peter XZ	Posted - 2010.08.06 10:55:00 - [92] Don't rationalise EVE lore technology, projecting technology thousands of years into the future means practically ALL of EVE technology is antiquated, why would you even need spaceships ?? It'll all be "beam me up Scotty stuff" by then , Anyway, when Biblical Armageddon happens, the future won't have anything to do with silly spaceships LOL
Gabriel Karade Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.08.06 11:09:00 - [93] The simple answer is don't try to peg it to in-game numbers, if you read the back story and the news items for exmaple, a doomsday blast from an Avatar essentially caused an extinction level event on one planet (of order 100 million Megatonnes). Also Tachyons are described in various places as carving vast canyons across the surface of planets during the minmatar rebellion... Finally look closely at the images contained in the poster 'The Iron tide' those surface detonations are vast... -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Tarkin Hamir	Posted - 2010.08.06 13:22:00 - [94] Originally by: Jack Airron Edited by: Jack Airron on 01/08/2010 09:32:37 Originally by: Estel Arador I guess you missed the memo telling you all civilisation collapsed for thousands of years... Yes, however taking into account he time of eves "dark age" they should still be 8000 years more advanced then us, for example today we have the technology to build a laser that outputs 1000 TW, a mega pulse laser in eve outputs 350ish GIGAwatts its absurd. not to mention drone bandwidth in the megabits range. We can build some very powerful lasers, however currently these are also MASSIVELY inefficent with huge amounts of power put in to get (relatively) little out and tend to be enormous - its a bit like saying the weight of shot fired by a medieval bombard is the same (or heavier) than that of a modern artillery piece. It's true but doesn't really tell you anything about the relative usefulness of the weapon
Dan O'Connor Cerberus Network Dignitas.	Posted - 2010.08.06 13:33:00 - [95] Originally by: Jack Airron Do eve weapons seem kind of primitive in scifi terms? Its 25000 Years into the future and we are shooting rail guns and lasers measured in the gigawatt range, and missiles that have a yield smaller then a modern day nuclear weapons. it seems silly that this is the extent of weapons technology in the year 27000-28000. The Triple-D (Doomsday device) and the jump drive, as well as the warp drive are pretty advanced if you ask me. Especially the warp drive since it employs depleted vacuum discs. <My tools> CCP Zymurgist > lol thats great Dan O'connor
Exordium8 Minmatar Hell's Horsemen	Posted - 2010.08.06 13:59:00 - [96] Originally by: Tei Lin I stay awake at night cause the pixel spaceships don't make sense!!!!!!! This tbh. --------------------------------- Pillage, then burn. Everything is air-droppable at least once. There is no 'overkill.' There is only 'open fire' and 'time to reload.
0hai	Posted - 2010.08.06 14:43:00 - [97] Originally by: Jack Airron Edited by: Jack Airron on 04/08/2010 04:06:05 There is no point in talking to someone as stupid as you, you seem to be even more stubborn then a Republican. The heat of a rail gun round passing trough the upper atmosphere would burn it up, you seep to thank that speed will allow it to pass trough unscathed but the speed only worsens the amount of heat being applied to the rail gun round. Take a look at burt rutan's shuttle, it has no need for ablative heat armor because of the amount of drag. What do i find advanced? google Stargate Atlantis plasma beam weapons. Like someone above me said, we have ships that travle at faster then light speeds, i doubt that any one would blink a eye at accelerating a 1400mm round to that speed. Just because you dont thank something is scifi doesn't mean its not scifi, you seem quite full of your self. First, Chill out dude. Second, This is EVE, not Stargate. Let's also not forget that for the vast majority of Stargate, they used P-90s. Also, here's a term I haven't seen thrown around: Suspension of Disbelief. And yes, I'll copy and paste this from Wikipedia because it sums up so perfectly what it means. Originally by: wikipedia Suspension of disbelief or "willing suspension of disbelief" is a formula named as such in English by the poet and aesthetic philosopher Samuel Taylor Coleridge to justify the use of fantastic or non-realistic elements in literature. Granted, it specifies literature, but it applies to any form of storytelling, be it film, novels, or even video games.
Karak Terrel As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions	Posted - 2010.08.06 14:49:00 - [98] Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Yes, thank you for saying what teeth grinding rage prevented me from getting out in a coherent manner. Nevertheless, you're wasting your time on these tards. You should not take more or stop the medication altogether without first talking to your doctor. Maybe that would prevent that rage and stop you from writing more BS into the forums. -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately.
Cory Sopapilla Minmatar Kiroshi Group	Posted - 2010.08.06 15:32:00 - [99] There comes a point in physics where you hit a threshold. You could make bigger and bigger energy weapons based on your power supply and energy capacity maxiumums, but I doubt you'd ever come up with one that doesn't break the laws of physics that could outdamage the kinetic energy of redirecting a large celestial object at a planet. More advanced != better. A 1600mm piece of lead fired at high velocity would pack quite a whollup. A laser jus gets stuff really hot and makes holes.
stoicfaux	Posted - 2010.08.06 17:15:00 - [100] Originally by: Jack Airron The heat of a rail gun round passing trough the upper atmosphere would burn it up, you seep to thank that speed will allow it to pass trough unscathed but the speed only worsens the amount of heat being applied to the rail gun round. True. But let's think outside the box. Light has mass and moves at the speed of light. If a beam of light can reach the surface without burning up in the atmosphere, then just maybe, with a little creativity (aka sci-fi science) you can speed up a projectile to just under the speed of light and have it hit the ground before the collisions with atmospheric atoms disrupt the projectile into ineffectiveness. Eve railguns appear to hit instantly. As in no apparent travel time. Which would mean they're traveling faster than the speed of light. Which raises all sorts of oddities and implications. Quote: Like someone above me said, we have ships that travle at faster then light speeds, i doubt that any one would blink a eye at accelerating a 1400mm round to that speed. Depends. Is the ship really moving at FTL speeds or is just moving at sublight speeds through a wormhole? ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"

Ehranavaar	Posted - 2010.08.06 17:37:00 - [101] Originally by: Dian'h Might Originally by: Culmen Plus do you realize the energy requirement to even accelerate a 1400mm slug of depleted uranium to 250km/s. Considering that the titans can travel faster than the speed of light (~300,000km/s), it should be trivial to accelerate a 1400mm slug to that speed. not if you are using an explosion to boot it in the butt. also we use cheat vigorously in eve by moving ourselves into another dimension to warp travel where the rules are different allowing us to break the light speed barrier without using up all the energy in the universe getting there.
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2010.08.06 17:50:00 - [102] The heat of a rail gun round passing trough the upper atmosphere would burn it up, you seep to thank that speed will allow it to pass trough unscathed but the speed only worsens the amount of heat being applied to the rail gun round. an inbound railgun round from an orbiting ship is essentially going to be fired straight down through the atmo at the target. assuming it's moving at 250 kps and there is quite negligible air pressure until you reach the last 30 km or so you have all of 12 hundreds of a second to vapourize the shell. if it was an antimatter round even if it happened instantly it's too late. there is a lovely site gives destruction rings for various sizes of bombs you might want to reference. try 100 MT as a starter and think that a 425mm could hold enough AM to add several zeroes to that. the other thing is that if you are looking at damage via warhead instead of simple kinetic energy there is NO reason on earth to fire the gun at full power. nor is there any reason to fire from the same grid as the planet is in. target is after all perfectly predictable in time and space which makes it a rather trivial exercise to lob rounds at it from a long ways out.
stoicfaux	Posted - 2010.08.06 19:10:00 - [103] Hrmm... Eve railguns don't shoot solid projectiles, they shoot a plasma bolt ... Antimatter Charge Consists of two components: a shell of titanium and a core of antimatter atoms suspended in plasma state. Railguns launch the shell directly, while particle blasters pump the plasma into a cyclotron and process the plasma into a bolt that is then fired. Even lead rounds get turned into a "bolt." Lead Charge Consists of two components: a shell of titanium and a core of lead atoms suspended in a plasma state. Railguns launch the shell directly, while particle blasters pump the plasma into a cyclotron and process the plasma into a bolt that is then fired. How does a plasma bolt remain cohesive over any meaningful distance, much less through an atmosphere? ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
ShahFluffers Gallente Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2010.08.06 19:32:00 - [104] Edited by: ShahFluffers on 06/08/2010 19:33:24 Originally by: stoicfaux How does a plasma bolt remain cohesive over any meaningful distance, much less through an atmosphere? Look at the descriptions you posted carefully. "Railguns launch the shells directly..." On the other hand, "... particle blasters pump the plasma into a cyclotron and process the plasma into a bolt that is then fired." Ergo, shooting from a railgun means that the shell casing is still intact while with a blaster it is not. _______________________ "Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown
Catherine Frasier	Posted - 2010.08.06 19:46:00 - [105] Originally by: stoicfaux How does a plasma bolt remain cohesive over any meaningful distance, much less through an atmosphere? Ideas
Barakkus Caelestis Iudicium	Posted - 2010.08.06 20:10:00 - [106] Originally by: Phil Exon YOUR IN A **ING SPACE SHIP. I'm on a boat motherer!!!! Don't forget your flipy-floppies... Originally by:** CCP Dropbear rofl edit: ah crap, dev account. Oh well, official rofl at you sir.
stoicfaux	Posted - 2010.08.06 21:02:00 - [107] Originally by: ShahFluffers Ergo, shooting from a railgun means that the shell casing is still intact while with a blaster it is not. Yup, my bad. However that leads to: Why would you suspend anti-matter and/or lead in a plasma state inside of a railgun shell? A HEAT round for a railgun is an odd thing to create. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
Culmen Caldari Blood Phage Syndicate Dead Terrorists	Posted - 2010.08.06 22:06:00 - [108] Edited by: Culmen on 06/08/2010 22:16:46 \ Quote: you are saying that the objective of planetary bombardment is to have the round burn up in the atmosphere, Thats is so ungodly stupid i dont even know how you could think of it. A projectile does'nt actually need to hit the ground to do damage. In June 30, 1908 an asteroid burned up in the atmosphere over Tunguska. It exploded with the force of a 5-30 megaton bomb, and flattened an area of forest over 2000 square kilometers, all without touching the ground. Ungodly stupid indeed.... and further more why do i even need a sig?
Lumy Minmatar eXceed Inc. HYDRA RELOADED	Posted - 2010.08.06 23:02:00 - [109] Compared to today's standard, EVE ships have ridiculous energy output. Still, they seem to be within acceptable limits. (Acceptable = do not throw your suspension of disbelief out of window). Compared to other sci-fi ... GET OUT! These are most stupid arguments on the internet. More "powerful" sci-fi settings are usually the ones with: - bad writing (main characters are essentially invincible) - more techno-babble (aka magic) - complete lack of author's sense of scale (let's just add few more zeroes to the exponent) Joomla! in EVE - IGB compatible CMS.
Halcyon Ingenium Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.08.07 04:37:00 - [110] Originally by: Karak Terrel Originally by: Halcyon Ingenium Yes, thank you for saying what teeth grinding rage prevented me from getting out in a coherent manner. Nevertheless, you're wasting your time on these tards. You should not take more or stop the medication altogether without first talking to your doctor. Maybe that would prevent that rage and stop you from writing more BS into the forums. And you should learn what humor is, maybe then you could take the ** out of your mouth and read a book. Originally by:** Dr Reinhold Eve is the endgame. Every other game you have played has just been preparation for this.



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.