| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Steppa
   |
Posted - 2005.11.10 00:57:00 -
[1]
I know there is a value for sig radius and sensor strengths innate to each ship, but there are a couple things that seem amiss.
If you have a battleship, you'd think that odds are you'd have MORE room to fit systems that could quickly lock any size of ship.
It's the frigates that should have trouble locking other frigates, not battleships. Frigates wouldn't have as much room internally to fit better sensor systems or redundant/complimentary systems.
None of what I'm talking about has anything to do with mods. I'm speaking to the innate ability each shiptype has to scan things bigger or smaller than itself.
Am I missing something? Which ship has a better sonar on it? A full-sized combat sub, or a two-man sub the like you see in science documentaries? Even if you WANTED to use the two-man sub for combat, you would simply not have the room on board to fit all the advanced equipment and sensors that a full-sized combat sub could.
|
Amos Sommers
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 01:00:00 -
[2]
I agree, specially if you look at Scorpions description :(
LOL U IS PWNED |
pshepherd
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 01:17:00 -
[3]
its a form of balance though, it allows small ships to escape before a bigger ship could kill it.
Another way which it could be done is large ships (bs) have fast lock times, but the time it takes to activate a large weapon would be longer. So other than a realism point, it'd probably be easier to keep it the way it is.
==============
This is a sig |
Solar Sailor
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 01:21:00 -
[4]
When you lock on to a ship you are tracing its energy signature. Frigates are small and move fast.
Have a corp mate orbit you in a frig at 10~20Km. Then Zoom right in on your BS and do Ctrl+F9. Now spot the frigate.
Now reverse the roles. Sensors will have the same problem, they have to find and track a small object moving at hundreds of metres a second, tens of thousands of metres away.
Although a frigate has fewer sensors its still a lot easier to target something bigger.
-------
Bringer of Squirrelly Wrath - Foaminian Card Cult
|
Professor McFly
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 01:35:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Solar Sailor
When you lock on to a ship you are tracing its energy signature. Frigates are small and move fast.
Have a corp mate orbit you in a frig at 10~20Km. Then Zoom right in on your BS and do Ctrl+F9. Now spot the frigate.
Now reverse the roles. Sensors will have the same problem, they have to find and track a small object moving at hundreds of metres a second, tens of thousands of metres away.
Although a frigate has fewer sensors its still a lot easier to target something bigger.
None of that explains why frigates can quickly and easily target other frigates 
It's just a case of gameplay balance being more important than things making sense.
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 01:59:00 -
[6]
One RP explanation is that frigates, being much smaller, cause much less interference, letting sensors be more accurate.
-
Proud member of the [23].
Don't get the reference in my sig? Click it.
|
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 02:05:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Vishnej on 10/11/2005 02:05:35
Okay, I narratize it thusly:
There are two components to ship sensors in a modern pod-piloted ship - the human mind and the ship's motion trackers. In order to pick up a target, the pod pilot himself, using the human mind's inherently powerful pattern recognition abilities, has to pick up its signature out of the white noise, then pass on that signature to the ship's computers, which are able to roughly interpolate its location. The motion trackers are what keeps the ship locked once you've identified it, so that you can go on to locking something else.
The trackers themselves are not very effected by background energy - once they've detected their object they can follow it indefinitely - but they're very vulnerable to deliberate pulses of energy aimed at the ship. The pilot, on the other hand, only needs to worry about initially picking up the object. While the greater number of sensors on a big ship allow one to target much further off(trigonometry), the interference caused by the ship's own megawatts of energy disappation right next to the ship makes recognising the signature of another ship take much longer. Things like interceptors don't have this problem, because they don't have the raw bulk of machinery attached to the sensors to distract the pilot with static.
T2 Destroyers: a proposal
Requested Changes: An alphabet's worth |
Hon Kovell
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 02:23:00 -
[8]
Battleships are designed to fight battleships and other large things. Their targeting systems are designed to target large things. There is also the usual problem with automated AI attacks. They easily infiltrate the more complex systems of a battleship and the extra sa***uards needed to prevent takeover of the ship slow down targeting.
|
Ibobah'k Chisaraj
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 02:48:00 -
[9]
Oh hell yes!
Western naval vessels have had super-efficient CIWS weapon systems since 1979 to enhance platform survivability
Why cant my Domi have one? It wants one so bad!
|
Theron Gyrow
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 09:01:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
One RP explanation is that frigates, being much smaller, cause much less interference, letting sensors be more accurate.
Yes. The Magic Warp Drive Field (tm) theory nicely explains everything:
- why battleship's locking time is longer than frigate's (battleship's sensors are better, but the field is much stronger and causes huge interference)
- why there is a max speed (the field can only warp space so much)
- why one cannot lock a ship in full warp (field too strong)
- why battleship guns do only a bit better DoT than frigate guns (the field interference again)
- why missiles are so strongly affected by target's sig radius (remote detonation needed)
- MWD signature multiplier
- probably lots of other things I cannot be bothered to think about
Some theory is also necessary to explain the decidedly non-Einsteinian and non-Newtonian physics. Corollary: if you want to complain that something is "not realistic", you have to somehow explain the bits that definitely are not realistic according to today's knowledge first.
--
Gradient's forum |
Rodj Blake
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 09:16:00 -
[11]
Battleships have a maximum locking distance far greater than the average frigate.
That means that the volume of space covered by their sensors is significantly bigger - when you double the range, you octuple the volume.
Hence, they take longer to scan.
Dolce et decorum est pro imperator mori |
Critta
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 09:18:00 -
[12]
Yes - battleships *do* have more room to fit sensors than frigates - it's called many more mid-slots filled with sensor boosters - that's the point, you *can* fit more systems that can quickly lock any type of shipe.
The question is, whether you have.
|
Splutty Eriminov
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 10:14:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Theron Gyrow
Some theory is also necessary to explain the decidedly non-Einsteinian and non-Newtonian physics. Corollary: if you want to complain that something is "not realistic", you have to somehow explain the bits that definitely are not realistic according to today's knowledge first.
Well. That's easy, actually. If you ever actually looked at your screen, you'll notice that you're in one hell of a big nebula, which contains a high concentration of gasses, which will be quite similar to any atmosphere in regards to ship control :)
Simple, eh?
(Uhm. Yeah..)
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |