| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Myrkala
Royal Robot Ponies
Happy Cartel
67
   |
Posted - 2013.11.18 00:36:00 -
[91] - Quote
Good changes... I am however a little worried that the differences in time needed for the shorter warps in the classes cruisers and smaller might be a bit too much, a 13 second difference between a Cruiser and Frigate for a 10 AU warp...
Before there was no difference between a Cruiser and a Frigate for a 10 AU warp and a 20 AU warp only meant a 3 second difference. With the changes it will be a 13 second difference for 10 AU and 15 second difference for 20 AU.
I feel that the differences in time needed for travel over shorter differences is too large, and the differences over longer distances is probably still a bit too large but are probably close to being reasonable. |
Tauren Tom
Order of the Silver Dragons
Silver Dragonz
95
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 00:52:00 -
[92] - Quote
Well... I will no longer be offering domestic freight support :\
Anyone want to buy a Gallente freighter with a local history in Molden Heath?
In the grand scheme of things... You're all pubbies. So HTFU."It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses." - Elwood Blues |
Alpharius Astartes
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 04:37:00 -
[93] - Quote
This is great! A suggestion if I may: would it be possible to incorporate '30AU warp travel time' into the EFT? |
chaos666wraith
Cyber Chaos Crew
28
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 16:29:00 -
[94] - Quote
:WARNING MEATBAGS:
MALFUNCTIONING PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC DOCUMENT DETECTED
It is written in this devblog that "ships in EVE don't follow the physical acceleration models that we might be familiar with in the real world". This is correct. They don't.
But neither does a ship when "travelling" with an hypothetical warp drive. Acceleration, deceleration and speed are measurements that will always have a value of "0" (zero) when observed on a ship or any other object placed inside the contracting and expanding spacetime-displacing region created by such device.
Accelerating an object to a speed of even 1 AU/s is impossible, nothing can be accelerated to the speed of light which is only 0,002 AU/s.
What an hypothetical warp drive constructed with exotic matter/anti-matter does is not accelerate an object according to Newton's physics laws, but rather warp or bend the spacetime around it according to the principles in Einstein's field equations. |
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
The Cursed Few
3758
|
Posted - 2013.11.19 03:52:00 -
[95] - Quote
On the test server, I managed to make an interceptor go 24 AU per second. To test it out, I decided to warp to another station.
Afterwards, I had to change my underwear.
Mane 614
|
Infinion
Awesome Corp
38
|
Posted - 2013.11.19 04:09:00 -
[96] - Quote
What is planned for pods? Will they retain the same k values as cruisers or will they be made to accelerate and decelerate slower than before? |
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
638
|
Posted - 2013.11.19 07:49:00 -
[97] - Quote
So....Freighters
Its blatantly obvious that the Devs who came up with this idea have never flown a Freighter. They may have tried it for 10 minutes on SISI or something, but NEVER actually flown one in any meaningful way.
To make one of the slowest ships in the game, even slower over the most common used warp distances is so moronic it is beyond belief.
To quote Fozzie from the other thread where these concerns were ignored:
GÇ£Obviously there's a fine line to walk here, but I think we found a strong compromise with the amount that we raised the freighter and JF warp speeds. It is definitely an increase in their average warp times, which is intentional. But it's not back breaking and I believe that it's quite well balanced in relation to their massive cargoholds. For trips where faster warp speeds are needed, people always have the choice of taking smaller volumes in something like an industrial or DST. GÇ£
There is no compromise. You have slowed freighters down for 90% of their warps, with no benefits. You must have a different definition of compromise to the rest of the universe.
It is back breaking and not well balanced at all, you seriously do not have to use the word GÇ£balancedGÇ¥ in every post. Like I asked in the other thread, have YOU ever flown a Freighter in game for any length of time, not just on SISI for 10 minutes ?
Your comment about taking an industrial instead is so far out of touch with what the problem is here it is unreal. No surprises there. |
Samethos II
stuff prod
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.19 18:19:00 -
[98] - Quote
Rommiee wrote:So....Freighters
Its blatantly obvious that the Devs who came up with this idea have never flown a Freighter. They may have tried it for 10 minutes on SISI or something, but NEVER actually flown one in any meaningful way.
To make one of the slowest ships in the game, even slower over the most common used warp distances is so moronic it is beyond belief.
To quote Fozzie from the other thread where these concerns were ignored:
GÇ£Obviously there's a fine line to walk here, but I think we found a strong compromise with the amount that we raised the freighter and JF warp speeds. It is definitely an increase in their average warp times, which is intentional. But it's not back breaking and I believe that it's quite well balanced in relation to their massive cargoholds. For trips where faster warp speeds are needed, people always have the choice of taking smaller volumes in something like an industrial or DST. GÇ£
There is no compromise. You have slowed freighters down for 90% of their warps, with no benefits. You must have a different definition of compromise to the rest of the universe.
It is back breaking and not well balanced at all, you seriously do not have to use the word GÇ£balancedGÇ¥ in every post. Like I asked in the other thread, have YOU ever flown a Freighter in game for any length of time, not just on SISI for 10 minutes ?
Your comment about taking an industrial instead is so far out of touch with what the problem is here it is unreal. No surprises there.
+1 !
nice idea from ccp suggesting to use indus instead of JF/freighters. It's just 30 to 90 forth and back...for only one with your big ship...5h to do a logistic on 3 jumps... come on.
I hope they will realize their big mistake.
Another point that nobody (or nearly) talked about... In pvp, nobody will want to bait anymore. The new bait will die 15 times before its friend could take control of the grid ^^, oh yeah intys will save its ass from15-20 battleships or something according ccp opinion i guess...
The pvp was frozen enough before the patch, but now, battleships and battlecruisers class will completly disappear. Nice job, we are happy to pay suscription for years and skilling and finally have no use of this. |
William Arnolles
Push Industries
Push Interstellar Network
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.19 19:42:00 -
[99] - Quote
Red Frog Rufen wrote:
I can indeed confirm that you can expect a raise up to 50% coming with Rubicon. It will be discussed within the directors soon.
I agree with that.
We could even tax 1.5M per jump, that should do it. And to be honest I see alot of couriers for 1M/Jump in the Hauler's channel so... seems fair to me. |
ihcn
Life. Universe. Everything.
Clockwork Pineapple
213
|
Posted - 2013.11.20 08:35:00 -
[100] - Quote
Would it be possible to get this warp chart with more sig figs? Just one decimal place would really really help make sure i've got my formula right, especially for the small ships.
Also: I'm finding that my computed warp times are off by a constant factor (ie the error isn't affected by warp distance). It seems to be related somewhat to the fact that ships don't seem to come out of warp at 1/ms as the formula would imply. It seems like almost all of the error goes away if I account for all ships exiting warp at 100 m/s. Am I on the right track, is there some part of the formula that wasn't mentioned in the dev blog, or do I need to recheck my formulas?
For reference i'm the guy who made this http://eve-utils.net/maps/shortest_path/, and I'm currently updating the formulas |
xttz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
326
|
Posted - 2013.11.20 11:20:00 -
[101] - Quote
Warping with any capital now feels like being in TIDI. The worst part is that it's not even clear when the warp will end... you see the remaining distance counting down, and just as you think it will end, it drops even smaller:
15km...
10km...
6km...
3000m...
2100m...
1400m..
850m...
Acceleration isn't so big a deal, but when you're landing on grid it can easily take 15-20 seconds before the ship is controllable again, longer than most other ships now spend in warp.
Unless you plan to add a better visual indication of when a warp will end, I think the best solution is a lower cap on deceleration. We currently have a maximum value of 2, I think it would be fairer if instead the minimum value was 1 and the maximum upped slightly to 2.5 or even 3. This would preserve the difference between ship classes without appearing on grid too fast or too slowly. |
xttz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
326
|
Posted - 2013.11.20 12:00:00 -
[102] - Quote
Another thought came to mind... currently all possible warp speed buffs in the game are percentage-based. This means they give a bigger relative boost to smaller ships like Interceptors, and a trivial boost to battleships and capitals.
What if we have a module that worked like a MAPC for warp speed - adding a low fixed value that would be of little use to Interceptors but can really help things like Battleships? Adding 0.5 or 1 AU/s wouldn't be worth a module slot on a frigate-sized ship, but could make a respectable difference for Battleship-class. |
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P
C C P Alliance
1530
|
Posted - 2013.11.20 20:18:00 -
[103] - Quote
ihcn wrote:Would it be possible to get this warp chart with more sig figs? Just one decimal place would really really help make sure i've got my formula right, especially for the small ships. Also: I'm finding that my computed warp times are off by a constant factor (ie the error isn't affected by warp distance). It seems to be related somewhat to the fact that ships don't seem to come out of warp at 1/ms as the formula would imply. It seems like almost all of the error goes away if I account for all ships exiting warp at 100 m/s. Am I on the right track, is there some part of the formula that wasn't mentioned in the dev blog, or do I need to recheck my formulas? For reference i'm the guy who made this http://eve-utils.net/maps/shortest_path/, and I'm currently updating the formulas
You're mostly correct, yes. The exact time depends on the max (sub-warp) speed of the ship. Obviously this varies a lot even within a single ship class, and even more so depending on fittings. Ships will exit warp mode when their warping speed drops below 50% of sub-warp max speed, or 100m/s, whichever is the lower.
My chart is written assuming a simplified fixed exit at 100/ms, so it sounds like your math is good :)
"This one time, on patch day..."
CCP Masterplan -á| -áTeam Five-0: Rewriting the law |
|
ihcn
Life. Universe. Everything.
Clockwork Pineapple
218
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 05:14:00 -
[104] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote:^^^ That's a reasonable suggestion. Noted down! ihcn wrote:Would it be possible to get this warp chart with more sig figs? Just one decimal place would really really help make sure i've got my formula right, especially for the small ships. Also: I'm finding that my computed warp times are off by a constant factor (ie the error isn't affected by warp distance). It seems to be related somewhat to the fact that ships don't seem to come out of warp at 1/ms as the formula would imply. It seems like almost all of the error goes away if I account for all ships exiting warp at 100 m/s. Am I on the right track, is there some part of the formula that wasn't mentioned in the dev blog, or do I need to recheck my formulas? For reference i'm the guy who made this http://eve-utils.net/maps/shortest_path/, and I'm currently updating the formulas You're mostly correct, yes. The exact time depends on the max (sub-warp) speed of the ship. Obviously this varies a lot even within a single ship class, and even more so depending on fittings. Ships will exit warp mode when their warping speed drops below 50% of sub-warp max speed, or 100m/s, whichever is the lower. My chart is written assuming a simplified fixed exit at 100m/s, so it sounds like your math is good :)
Great. Thanks for your help :D |
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
2557
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 07:58:00 -
[105] - Quote
Scheduled plan: go pick the Golem, buy a bastion module, jump to mission system, perform a test mission. ETTC: 75 minutes
What really happened: 75 minutes later, I barely had docked at my mission system and had to log off. Today i'll test the bastion module.
Thank you for wasting my time, CCP Masterplan, I really needed a way to spend even more time doing nothing in this game. 
The Greater Fool Bar is now open for business, 24/7. Come and have drinks and fun somewhere between RL and New Eden! |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
388
|
Posted - 2013.11.21 14:10:00 -
[106] - Quote
xttz wrote:Warping with any capital now feels like being in TIDI. The worst part is that it's not even clear when the warp will end... you see the remaining distance counting down, and just as you think it will end, it drops even smaller:
15km...
10km...
6km...
3000m...
2100m...
1400m..
850m...
Acceleration isn't so big a deal, but when you're landing on grid it can easily take 15-20 seconds before the ship is controllable again, longer than most other ships now spend in warp.
Unless you plan to add a better visual indication of when a warp will end, I think the best solution is a lower cap on deceleration. We currently have a maximum value of 2, I think it would be fairer if instead the minimum value was 1 and the maximum upped slightly to 2.5 or even 3. This would preserve the difference between ship classes without appearing on grid too fast or too slowly.
Just a quick suggestion to clear confusion of warp exit, surely we can get the 'distance to warp bubble collapse' changed to 'time to warp bubble collapse' along with a countdown.
That way there will be less of an annoying 'are we there yet?' syndrome that large ship / capital pilots suffer from. shouldnt it be easy to convert the distance measurement to time client side? |
Morrrr
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 06:50:00 -
[107] - Quote
Accelerating an object to a speed of even 1 AU/s is impossible, nothing can be accelerated to the speed of light which is only 0,002 AU/s.
What an hypothetical warp drive constructed with exotic matter/anti-matter would do is not accelerate an object according to Newton's physics laws, but rather warp or bend the spacetime around it according to the principles in Einstein's field equations.[/quote]
FINALLY, Someone explains what I have been stating for the last couple days!
NEWTON LAW #2, Does not apply in non standard space/time.
THANKS! |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
389
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 15:08:00 -
[108] - Quote
Quote:Morrrr wrote:Accelerating an object to a speed of even 1 AU/s is impossible, nothing can be accelerated to the speed of light which is only 0,002 AU/s. What an hypothetical warp drive constructed with exotic matter/anti-matter would do is not accelerate an object according to Newton's physics laws, but rather warp or bend the spacetime around it according to the principles in Einstein's field equations. FINALLY, Someone explains what I have been stating for the last couple days!
NEWTON LAW #2, Does not apply in non standard space/time.
THANKS!
u guys should be playing kerbal then if u want a realistic physics engine to go toe to toe with. |
Nankeen Heron
Jim's Mowing
8
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 22:45:00 -
[109] - Quote
(Reposted from Rubicon feedback thread)
Suggestion: Can we have a second needle (red, perhaps) for % warp speed on the HUD?
Having the speedo pegged at 100% once warp is engaged is kind of pointless, and mousing over to read the numbers isn't ideal.
Cheers! |
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
640
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 23:11:00 -
[110] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote:^^^ That's a reasonable suggestion. Noted down! ihcn wrote:Would it be possible to get this warp chart with more sig figs? Just one decimal place would really really help make sure i've got my formula right, especially for the small ships. Also: I'm finding that my computed warp times are off by a constant factor (ie the error isn't affected by warp distance). It seems to be related somewhat to the fact that ships don't seem to come out of warp at 1/ms as the formula would imply. It seems like almost all of the error goes away if I account for all ships exiting warp at 100 m/s. Am I on the right track, is there some part of the formula that wasn't mentioned in the dev blog, or do I need to recheck my formulas? For reference i'm the guy who made this http://eve-utils.net/maps/shortest_path/, and I'm currently updating the formulas You're mostly correct, yes. The exact time depends on the max (sub-warp) speed of the ship. Obviously this varies a lot even within a single ship class, and even more so depending on fittings. Ships will exit warp mode when their warping speed drops below 50% of sub-warp max speed, or 100m/s, whichever is the lower. My chart is written assuming a simplified fixed exit at 100m/s, so it sounds like your math is good :)
CCP Masterplan.......
Responding to the easy posts and ignoring the ones you don't like.
Awesome stuff, and hardly surprising. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |