EVE Search - Physics - Celestial Mechanics

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Physics - Celestial Mechanics - Part I

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Korrimal Ohmiras EVE University Ivy League 0	Posted - 2012.12.15 15:53:00 - [1] - Quote I did a quick search and didn't see this idea pop up anywhere. Why do none of the solar systems have proper celestial mechanics to them? I.e. why don't the planets move? This might be an oversimplification of the idea but since a number of the game mechanics are updated daily (e.g. asteroid replacement) why shouldn't the planets / moons also move in their orbits? It would be kind of neat if you could build in actual physics into the mechanics of the game for at least a few items even if they are not implemented in real-time (i.e. items like customs offices whizzing around planets every 90 minutes) Any possibility of this?
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet 3164	Posted - 2012.12.15 16:39:00 - [2] - Quote How would it make the gameplay better? It would mean altering the current safepoint system, since the spacial locations ofsafepoints would alter on a constant basis. For example a safepoint on a POS would have to change location every time the celestial objects do. That means extra work and calculations, which makes the initial question very important.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 10672	Posted - 2012.12.15 16:56:00 - [3] - Quote Korrimal Ohmiras wrote: Why do none of the solar systems have proper celestial mechanics to them? I.e. why don't the planets move? Because it creates a lot of additional work for pretty much no benefit. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
Hakan MacTrew Caledonian Heavy Industries Sick N' Twisted 64	Posted - 2012.12.15 19:24:00 - [4] - Quote The sheer level of "Ball Ache" this would cause, (as cool as it would be,) puts this idea as firmly unfeasable and impractical. Having to recalculate destinations for the millions of jumps made on the server every day while cross referencing the movement of the hundreds of thousands of celestial objects would probably kill any server that CCP used. Not to mention saved locations and the like. MODULAR DRONES MORE ORE SHIPS
Crimeo Khamsi AirHogs Zulu People 64	Posted - 2012.12.15 20:13:00 - [5] - Quote Why does nobody understand how computers work? "Hundreds of thousands" of calculations could be accomplished in like... less than 1 second on any half decent modern computer (much less a crazy professional mainframe) It wouldn't be that hard at all, and it would be really cool, to have celestial bodies update their positions once per day. Clearly you wouldn't update the locations of celestials EVERY TICK, or anything like that. But just during the daily downtime, once a day, they could update, and it would have zero affect on anybody "lag"-wise. As for bookmarks, it's pretty easy: if the bookmark is withint 5000km or something of an significant object in space (moons, stations, planets, gates, etc.), then its location is stored and updated in relation to that object every day (so that insta-undock bookmarks and the like will be fine). Anything not within 5000km of anything does not update. I agree that it doesn't add a ton to the game, but it's probably (depends on how they have it set up) also not a difficult coding project, and it does add SOME things: 1) Coolness 2) A wider variety of possible safepoints in a system. If you call the same system home for more than a couple months, you can set up safepoints in it that are impossible to reach by any temporary residents (unless they scan you while you are at one of them). 3) Systems would gradually change over time in regards to how good they are for bubblecamping. At some points in the year, one might have a single bubble that will drag in anybody from any of the other stargates, and at other times, the approaches will all be different (and thus safer) Shrug, seems like a fine idea. Low-ish effort, very doable during downtimes, and moderate rewards.
Mike Voidstar Voidstar Free Flight Foundation 16	Posted - 2012.12.16 16:35:00 - [6] - Quote The calculations would only have to be done once. Determine how many days are in a year, map out the results, change maps daily. Done.
Zyrbalax III Goldcrest Enterprises 53	Posted - 2012.12.16 21:27:00 - [7] - Quote I like this idea. I too think it's daft that planets, moons etc don't orbit. Seems like a pretty basic requirement for a scifi game. Agree with other posters that the "issue" with bms is a non-issue; you just need some kind of tag showing what celestial the bm is "relative to", with default being the sun. I like the possible use of orbital motion for creating better safes too. +1 Z3
Michael Harari The Hatchery Team Liquid 403	Posted - 2012.12.16 22:34:00 - [8] - Quote Crimeo Khamsi wrote: As for bookmarks, it's pretty easy: if the bookmark is withint 5000km or something of an significant object in space (moons, stations, planets, gates, etc.), then its location is stored and updated in relation to that object every day (so that insta-undock bookmarks and the like will be fine). Anything not within 5000km of anything does not update. . At some stations, I have insta undocks several AU off
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld 18	Posted - 2012.12.16 23:19:00 - [9] - Quote I like the idea behind celestial mechanics, agreed it has no real game benefit but it would add to the feeling of immersion. WHilst were speculating about idea, why cant we have realistic asteroid belts. A typical real world asteroid belt has large rocks separated by roughly 1.5 million km in a ring around the parent star. I like the idea of scanning down a large free floating roid and warping to something that is perhaps 5 to 30 km in diameter and contains enough ore to last you months of mining. You could share such bounty with your friends or keep mining it in secret for total profit or in low sec you might even want to defend it against others who might find it or scan it down when they are looking for you. I know it's highly unlikely we'll see anything like this so there's no point any of the 'we hate change' crowd shooting down my idea anytime soon, but it's fun to muse.
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld 18	Posted - 2012.12.16 23:19:00 - [10] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: Crimeo Khamsi wrote: As for bookmarks, it's pretty easy: if the bookmark is withint 5000km or something of an significant object in space (moons, stations, planets, gates, etc.), then its location is stored and updated in relation to that object every day (so that insta-undock bookmarks and the like will be fine). Anything not within 5000km of anything does not update. . At some stations, I have insta undocks several AU off Those insta undocks would be relative to the station so from your point of view there's no change.
Morgan North The Wild Bunch Electus Matari 92	Posted - 2012.12.17 00:52:00 - [11] - Quote Honestly, while i like this idea... Most planet's would rotate in a fairly slow slow orbit. Mospeople wouldn't notice. I'm always on the same system and I never actually felt as if things were that static, i don't stay still long enough to actually see things move. I do have a situation/problem with the way lightning affects the moons/planets, but its an entirely different story to this one, so without moving away of the subject... i don't think you'd actually notice planetary movement outside planetary rotation (I'm not even sure that exists, but I think it does...), so while yes, the calculations only needed to be done "once" (Or rather, once for every single system in eve's normal database, and once per day to all player-located bookmarks, since they'd rotate) it wouldn't really change anything... Your bookmarks would need to be either then static, or fixed to a celestial, keepign its relationships as best as possible, and I still don't see why this'd help since anyone who probed it once would probably receive it as also being static or fixed to a celestial body. At best you could have small deviations, but in general, extra complexity for too little gains.
Rams Trough'put Dormant Dragons 0	Posted - 2012.12.17 06:49:00 - [12] - Quote Its a neat idea that MAY add a LITTLE to the immersion of the game..... I would rather a random'ish event like a comet or a asteroid or a meteor shower or some other transitory object, that you could interact with... maybe chase it down and get caught in the gravity well and dragged along with it.
Jim Luc Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 38	Posted - 2012.12.17 07:05:00 - [13] - Quote I just made a thread for this. Glad someone else also wants it. As someone said above, calculations would only have to be generated once and be based off a timestamp. Current bookmarks, if they are a coordinate in space would not have to change. Current locations would be based off their celestial. Permanent deadspace and other areas in the middle of space would be treated like planets, and get an orbit. Then all that would have to be done is write a wrapper to get the current location of target said object. I think adding large nearby celestial data to each packet sent to the client wouldn't be difficult though, this way we can watch a sunrise on our home station, or see the dark side of a planet, or the rare alignments of the moons around a spot. No need to make the entire universe spin, just the planets and other celestials. I love this idea.
Crimeo Khamsi AirHogs Zulu People 66	Posted - 2012.12.17 19:17:00 - [14] - Quote Quote: I like the idea of scanning down a large free floating roid and warping to something that is perhaps 5 to 30 km in diameter and contains enough ore to last you months of mining. Yeah, you might like it, until the huge fleets of trivially easy to code perma-mining bots saturated 80% of the market, moving in a lazy line from asteroid to asteroid indefinitely and warping to station/back to fleet, making the profession pretty much unprofitable for any legitimate pilots. At least now there is good control over how much ore is released into the market, there are chokepoints where people can find one another without combat probes, rats are much easier to set up, and belts run out, requiring somewhat more intelligent (hard to bot) intervention.
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld 19	Posted - 2012.12.17 22:15:00 - [15] - Quote Crimeo Khamsi wrote: Quote: I like the idea of scanning down a large free floating roid and warping to something that is perhaps 5 to 30 km in diameter and contains enough ore to last you months of mining. Yeah, you might like it, until the huge fleets of trivially easy to code perma-mining bots saturated 80% of the market, moving in a lazy line from asteroid to asteroid indefinitely and warping to station/back to fleet, making the profession pretty much unprofitable for any legitimate pilots. At least now there is good control over how much ore is released into the market, there are chokepoints where people can find one another without combat probes, rats are much easier to set up, and belts run out, requiring somewhat more intelligent (hard to bot) intervention. Like the mining botters don't already do this...
Octoven Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming 28	Posted - 2012.12.17 22:29:00 - [16] - Quote I can tell you why planets, moons, and belts don't move. Your warp drive calculates its destination as you activate it, furthermore, it travels in a linear fashion. Assuming things move, you would exit warp and nothing would be there lol
Crimeo Khamsi AirHogs Zulu People 66	Posted - 2012.12.17 23:11:00 - [17] - Quote Little Dragon Khamez wrote: Like the mining botters don't already do this... I gave you multiple reasons why it would be worse with your suggested asteroid belts, none of which you responded to. "Oh but there are bots already!" is not a valid excuse for making things much much EASIER for them. The number of bots matters, you know. Not just a binary "exist/don't exist" value.
Agromos nulKaedi The Scope Gallente Federation 24	Posted - 2012.12.18 01:37:00 - [18] - Quote For celestials that are closer to the sun than Dscan range, the distances really do not matter. For celestials further than the sun than dscan range, it takes decades or even centuries for them to go around their sun. As such, in practical terms they do not move at all. So what is this adding, exactly?
Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 283	Posted - 2012.12.18 04:56:00 - [19] - Quote Obviously all celestials have long since stopped moving due to friction with eve space water...
Crimeo Khamsi AirHogs Zulu People 66	Posted - 2012.12.18 05:37:00 - [20] - Quote Agromos nulKaedi wrote: For celestials that are closer to the sun than Dscan range, the distances really do not matter. For celestials further than the sun than dscan range, it takes decades or even centuries for them to go around their sun. As such, in practical terms they do not move at all. 1) Even with our own physics, that assumes a sun-sized star. Jita, for example, is probably about 10 times as massive as the sun, and a planet at one dscan range would revolve around it every few years. 2) That said, the physics of the eve universe are obviously not the same as our own. E.g. when you turn off your engines you stop moving... (thus, space liquid everywhere). There's no reason at all why a planet at one d-scan range could not be standardized to revolve around an earth-sized sun in about 2 months in eve physics.
MItchell Jensen Gravit Negotii S2N Citizens 3	Posted - 2012.12.18 07:17:00 - [21] - Quote I think the physics are changed from what they would be in the real world based on making the game easier to run (it is working on a 2003 base engine), and simplicity. Liquid space is present because otherwise all you would have to do is start moving in one direction at your ship's.... well you know what I don't have to explain this, if you're playing this game you probably passed grade 10 science. It's just to keep things simple, and allow the game to have a level of realism that's believable, fun, and works with the game mechanics. Nobody wants to be able to use a microwarp to get to 29km/s, then just turn it off and be able to drift for an eternity.
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld 19	Posted - 2012.12.18 10:54:00 - [22] - Quote Crimeo Khamsi wrote: Little Dragon Khamez wrote: Like the mining botters don't already do this... I gave you multiple reasons why it would be worse with your suggested asteroid belts, none of which you responded to. "Oh but there are bots already!" is not a valid excuse for making things much much EASIER for them. The number of bots matters, you know. Not just a binary "exist/don't exist" value. Sigh, refer to my earlier post about the 'we hate change crowd'. That's why I didn't bother responding, there was no point. I agree with you on the whole warp trajectory being easy to calculate though, so I'm not all bad and that's why I liked your post.
Korrimal Ohmiras EVE University Ivy League 1	Posted - 2013.02.28 20:01:00 - [23] - Quote MItchell Jensen wrote: Liquid space is present because otherwise all you would have to do is start moving in one direction at your ship's.... well you know what I don't have to explain this, if you're playing this game you probably passed grade 10 science. The other way to look at the whole "liquid space thing" is that in order to go faster than light you are obviously using some form of string theory mechanic and dark matter energy. So when you have engines on you are not actually travelling in normal space but something that does have some inertial resistance to it. (in short - no idea - but it sounds good :-) How else can you explain missiles that can maintain constant velocity for 54km but seem to come to a sudden dead stop at 55km whereas trying to bring a frigate to a dead stop in the same 1km is impossible? I get the point thou that there are still limits to the number of calculations you will want to have the physics engine do in real-time. Calculating trajectories based on space curvatures to get from point A to B for example would be awesome even if it only frustrates the heck of people that don't like calculus. There would be so much more depth I think to the game though if as processing power continues to get better that more and more of these types of elements could be included. The one thing I really like about eve is that you aren't just sitting there shooting things in PVP or PVE but you actually have to think as part of it.
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris Republic Military Tax Avoiders 39	Posted - 2013.02.28 20:36:00 - [24] - Quote If you want game be more realistic: Before making planets spin - they should implement line-of sight for all turret ships. So you can hide behind structure or asteroid or another (friendly/enemy) ship.
Callic Veratar Power of the Phoenix 337	Posted - 2013.02.28 20:41:00 - [25] - Quote There need to be some changes to how grids work first, like they need to be able to move (useful for DUST interaction) and enhancing grid content detection for warfare links. Once all that happens, it's possible for the planets to rotate around their real axis, rather than tumble around a vertical axis and orbit properly. That being said, it's a TON of work for little gain, so, while it's likely on the radar it definitely shouldn't be a priority. DirectX 11, it's not rocket appliance!
Yolo Dominion of Inter-Celestial Kings SQUEE. 15	Posted - 2013.02.28 20:50:00 - [26] - Quote This has been suggested lots of times. Sooner or later they will have to give in.
Celestial One Militant Miners 12	Posted - 2013.03.01 02:30:00 - [27] - Quote What? My mechanics are fine leave me alone.

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

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