| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Daesdemona
   |
Posted - 2003.09.24 13:56:00 -
[1]
OK, the two sides, last I remember are arguing that jump-in points should be scattered, that they shouldn't lag, but with this is inconsisten with the whole 'stargate' technology.
Now, what if, there were 'cameras' at each gate, that allowed for a 360 view (or a radar view to save graphics) into the next system.
this way you COULD have jump-in points correspond with gates and avoid the unpleasant jump-dead thing, as evryone could check the other side.
This will infuriate pirates of course, because of the whole ambush thing, so for fairness, the inter-gate radar could be range limited to 70-120 kms and the area 6 kms around the gate have a 15 second 90% hardener applied to new people, together with warp- disability. This would still allow pirates to rush the gate once someone warps in, but would buy both sides time to prepare for combat/ use ECM.
NOTE: This will only be viable once the module that pulls out of warp / module that prevents that is available... before that this will be unbalanced. Another thing that will help move the battle away from gates is the appearance off Player controlled static objects.
my 2c, now yours... still better than flaming about M2s
-----------------------------------------------
Bart: "Do you even have a job any more?"
Homer: "I think its obvious that I Don't"
----------------------------------------------- |
EagleFour
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 13:58:00 -
[2]
I have absolutely no opinion on this issue...different strokes for different folks i guess, I am gonna respect your post and not flame hows that :)
JOBS - Got Moin?
|
Ubiq
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 14:08:00 -
[3]
Oh wait I have an idea. How about CCP fixes the spawn in lag issues?
|
Daesdemona
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 14:12:00 -
[4]
 Quote:
Oh wait I have an idea. How about CCP fixes the spawn in lag issues?
duh...
This is a suggestion AROUND an issue that will unlikely be solved EVER.
-----------------------------------------------
Bart: "Do you even have a job any more?"
Homer: "I think its obvious that I Don't"
----------------------------------------------- |
Jarjar
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 14:14:00 -
[5]
Quote:
Oh wait I have an idea. How about CCP fixes the spawn in lag issues?
We all know that getting 0 lag is impossible when the client has got to get models, textures and render sometimes more than 50 objects.
However, an option to not render objects (1 option for drones, 1 for ships?) further away than 10km would be nice. Maybe even 1-2km for drones.
|
Bobby Wilson
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 14:34:00 -
[6]
Quote:
Quote:
Oh wait I have an idea. How about CCP fixes the spawn in lag issues?
We all know that getting 0 lag is impossible when the client has got to get models, textures and render sometimes more than 50 objects.
However, an option to not render objects (1 option for drones, 1 for ships?) further away than 10km would be nice. Maybe even 1-2km for drones.
OR, simply don't show the incoming ship until the server gets confirmation that the client is fully loaded. Play many other online games and this is exactly what they do. You appear and can be attacked at *exactly* the same time that you can see the environment, and can attack in turn.
Originally by: Selim
Cool, congrats.
Oh, stupid idea by the way.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 15:38:00 -
[7]
Jump-in points should be random.
That's the easiest and less code-heavy solution.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Jarjar
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 16:01:00 -
[8]
Bobby Wilson: Of course, if there's an easy way to do that (which according to many there is, WITHOUT the client telling the server, which is obviously exploitable), that would clearly be the best solution.
|
Gigi Ana
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 16:04:00 -
[9]
Quote:
OR, simply don't show the incoming ship until the server gets confirmation that the client is fully loaded. Play many other online games and this is exactly what they do. You appear and can be attacked at *exactly* the same time that you can see the environment, and can attack in turn.
Similar idea ... when I first warp into an area, I can't target lock anything for several seconds "your ship is aligning its magnetic field", all that would need to be done is after a warp/jump, have this restriction apply two ways ... the newly arrived vessel can't target lock anything for several seconds and nothing can target lock the newly arrived vessel until that same limit is over "the vessel cannot be locked due to a high magnetic field"
It ought to be relatively simple, since there apparently is already some kind of a check to see if a target can be locked or not ...
But I don't know what EVE's code looks like for that, so maybe not ...
~Gigi~ |
Danton Marcellus
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 16:08:00 -
[10]
 Idea Lab. 
Convert Stations
|
Ezra
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 18:12:00 -
[11]
Quote:
OK, the two sides, last I remember are arguing that jump-in points should be scattered, that they shouldn't lag, but with this is inconsisten with the whole 'stargate' technology.
Now, what if, there were 'cameras' at each gate, that allowed for a 360 view (or a radar view to save graphics) into the next system.
this way you COULD have jump-in points correspond with gates and avoid the unpleasant jump-dead thing, as evryone could check the other side.
This will infuriate pirates of course, because of the whole ambush thing, so for fairness, the inter-gate radar could be range limited to 70-120 kms and the area 6 kms around the gate have a 15 second 90% hardener applied to new people, together with warp- disability. This would still allow pirates to rush the gate once someone warps in, but would buy both sides time to prepare for combat/ use ECM.
NOTE: This will only be viable once the module that pulls out of warp / module that prevents that is available... before that this will be unbalanced. Another thing that will help move the battle away from gates is the appearance off Player controlled static objects.
my 2c, now yours... still better than flaming about M2s
This won't really help that much, since in many cases the presence of ships on the other side of a gate is known through proper intelligence collection.
The issue is not surprise ambushes - It's the fact that a superior force (2x the ships) aimply cannot win or even have a chance against a spawncamping force.
------------
Ezra Cornell
pe0n, Xanadu Corporation |
Scragg
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 18:30:00 -
[12]
I'd say randomize the jump in points. Camping the jump in with 20 ships and drones deployed so you can lagg a target is by no means what I would call a "tactic". It's an exploit.
Scragg, Tyrell Corporation
Vice-Director Military Operations |
Kaylon Syi
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 18:40:00 -
[13]
Indeed... but exploits happen in real life. CCP won't fix that soon. The idea of not being able to lock on a target that is adjusting its magnetic feild seem a good idea. It could hinder on both sides easier and make sense.
my +2 cents
|
Sc0rpion
|
Posted - 2003.09.24 18:52:00 -
[14]
Forgive my pseudocode:
CSystem.LoadEnvironment( oPlayer , nSystemID )
{
RenderEnvironment(nSystemID);
location lCurrentGrid = RetrieveGridLocation(oPlayer);
RenderObjectList (lCurrentGrid);
//Notice how this line is *LAST*
InsertPlayerAtLocation( oPlayer , OSystem(nSystemID).lWarpInPoint);
}
Code makes forum stretch! Bad code! - Orestes
"The true secret to enjoying life is to live it dangerously."
-Freidrich Nietzche |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |