Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
332
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 17:59:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello,
I would like to start a discussion about what I'd call "better pathfinding", for lack of a better term.
Right now, when Drones, Missiles or Ships want to approach a target, they just fly straight at it, which will increase the distance they need to cross if the target is moving.
The shortest possible trajectory would actually use the target's current speed vector (which is known, since it shows up in the overview) to calculate an intercept course.
The exact same mechanic could be used to optimize the "keep at range" and "orbit" orders by taking the target's vector into account when adjusting course.
Another current problem is that the "orbit" command currently doesn't always go for the lowest course correction needed, when starting an orbit maneouvre or in case of a max speed change (propmod (de)activation or web). in fact, it sometimes makes a complete U-turn to enter a new orbit, which can result in the ship taking heavy damage during the U-turn for no reason.
It would be alot better if the "autopilot" always selected the lowest possibile vector modification to achieve orbit.
Those are some of the reasons why "manual piloting" is (almost) necessary in a variety of situations.
What I would like to talk about is:
A) What would this mean for:
- Missile users and their opponents? - Drone users and their opponents? - KIters and their opponents?
B) By how much, if at all, would implementing better pathfinding increase serverload? "I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
333
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 19:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Since I'm not sure how much more server load that would mean I'll leave that part to you guys. I'd be interested nonetheless.
So:
What would this mean for missile users and their opponents ?
First of all, more effective range for missiles in case of the target not changing trajectory.
It would allow slower missiles to hit faster targets more easily.
However, the target could also try to outsmart the missiles, but I doubt that would make a big difference for missiles, just because there are most likely multiple volleys coming.
What would this mean for missile users and their opponents ?
It would be alot harder for fast ships to get rid of drones. Not only would drones come into weapons range more often, they also would not follow the target in a straigt line unless the target itself is moving in a straigt line away from the drones.
It would allow slower drones to occasionally get into weapons range with fast targets and get off a shot or two.
What would this mean for kiters and their opponents ?
This is trickier. Intercepting approaches, would make it easier for the slow ship to land tackle. On the other hand, smarter "orbit" or "keep at range" manoeuvres make this harder. It would probably make agility much more important, as both ship's computers would struggle to adjust to the other's vector.
However, it would definitely make it easier to outmanoeuver turrets with the orbit function, because the computer would try to avoid sharp manoeuvres for which the ship has to slow down and runs the risk of getting hit.
I think overall it would make the gameplay more appealing. Manual piloting would be fun with a joystick, but I don't enjoy it with double clicking in space. So right now, I mostly view it as annoying. Of course, seeing the "pathfinding" AI making dumb decisions is just as annoying, which is how I came to think about this in the first place. "I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
755
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 19:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:
Another current problem is that the "orbit" command currently doesn't always go for the lowest course correction needed, when starting an orbit maneouvre or in case of a max speed change (propmod (de)activation or web). in fact, it sometimes makes a complete U-turn to enter a new orbit, which can result in the ship taking heavy damage during the U-turn for no reason.
I've always found this irksome as well. Mere velocity changes shouldn't result in an orbital plane change. "Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Ines Tegator
Towels R Us
476
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 02:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
The approach mechanics are mind numbingly stupid. They simply pick a point, and accelerate towards it. Orbit is no different; it just picks a point x distance from the target. That's why it's so easy to slingshot someone that's orbiting you and why all good pvper's manually orbit instead of using the built in orbit button.
This is core EVE behavior and I don't think it'll be changed any time soon. Legacy code and all that. It could really use a complete overhaul of the entire ship movement system, though. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there? |
PaulsAvatar
IXCO
4
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 02:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
Pathfinding could use an improvement across the board. +1 |
Senji Vuran
Revenant Tactical
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 03:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
+1, I'm sure I've got a smartphone floating in the pod with me, it's powerful enough to compute better courses. |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
342
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 06:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
The question isn't so much whether or not it could be done. I'm pretty sure CCP's programmers are up to the task. The question is: Would it be worth the effort? What impact would this have on gameplay? "I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed |
Bohneik Itohn
Periphery Bound
210
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 06:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Nice idea, now here's a riddle.
You're in a Battlecruiser, and you get attacked and pointed by an interceptor. The interceptor begins to orbit you at a range just outside the reach of your scram, and if you don't get the scram on him you'll die a slow and embarrassing death.
Your maximum speed in the BC is 400m/s. The interceptor is traveling at 4000m/s. Your position is being relayed to the server once every second.
What do you think would happen if your BC was being told to turn 180 degrees every second?
It may be an extreme example, but it serves well to highlight how this can be abused without trying. Just imagine what would happen if someone tried to abuse advanced pathing.
Orbiting needs more functionality everyone can agree. Everything else? Don't touch it, for the sake of everyone's sanity.
So much horror. Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!-á-á - Freyya |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
1093
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 06:37:00 -
[9] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:The question isn't so much whether or not it could be done. I'm pretty sure CCP's programmers are up to the task. The question is: Would it be worth the effort? What impact would this have on gameplay?
Yes, it would be worth the effort. :)
Stupidity should be a bannable offense.
Also This --> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216699 Please stop making "afk cloak" threads, thanks in advance. |
Auduin Samson
Do not disturb Sanctuary Pact
220
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 07:33:00 -
[10] - Quote
It definitely needs an overhaul. I think that orbiting should be relative to your current velocity. If you're going in a certain direction toward your target anyway, your ship shouldn't suddenly change direction to go in a pointlessly different orbital path. This would improve orbital adjustments while still giving the advantage to the one that can manually pilot their ship effectively. You just lost your ship The tears will fuel my spaceship Go quit Eve again
-Bane Nucleus-á |
|
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
686
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 09:35:00 -
[11] - Quote
With regards to increased server load...
The current system makes 1 single calculation - what is the vector from where you are to the thing you are approaching. Improved pathfinding would have to calculate the position of the target with respect to time as a function of a whole host of things that affect an object's trajectory. Then it would have to do the same for your ship or missile or drone, etc... and then it would have to perform a multivariable optimization to find the lowest t-value (time) at which an intercept could occur. It has to repeat this process every single server tick.
And that is just the approach function for one pair of objects. Imagine a battle with 1000 players all using approach, orbit, keep at range, firing missiles, using drones, bombs, etc.... Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0 |
RcTamiya Leontis
Satan's Unicorns
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 09:40:00 -
[12] - Quote
I see huge performance issues with that, just saying ... even if the calculation would be clientbased, you still would spam the server with new waypoints to set and that will have an impact in huge fleetfights :/
However for smallscale it's an improvement, I agree.
Possible solution: Turn improved pathfinding off during Tidi ? |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
342
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 16:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
RcTamiya Leontis wrote:I see huge performance issues with that, just saying ... even if the calculation would be clientbased, you still would spam the server with new waypoints to set and that will have an impact in huge fleetfights :/
However for smallscale it's an improvement, I agree.
Possible solution: Turn improved pathfinding off during Tidi ?
I think that the whole point of Tidi is not to lose functionality, so turning things off during Tidi wouldn't make much sense. It would possibly even result in TiDi going away once the feature is turned off, and kicking back in immediately as the server tries to restart the feature it just turned off.
And clientbased trajectory calculations are just a big invite to abuse. "I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
342
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 16:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
Bohneik Itohn wrote:Nice idea, now here's a riddle.
You're in a Battlecruiser, and you get attacked and pointed by an interceptor. The interceptor begins to orbit you at a range just outside the reach of your scram, and if you don't get the scram on him you'll die a slow and embarrassing death.
Your maximum speed in the BC is 400m/s. The interceptor is traveling at 4000m/s. Your position is being relayed to the server once every second.
What do you think would happen if your BC was being told to turn 180 degrees every second?
It may be an extreme example, but it serves well to highlight how this can be abused without trying. Just imagine what would happen if someone tried to abuse advanced pathing.
Orbiting needs more functionality everyone can agree. Everything else? Don't touch it, for the sake of everyone's sanity.
So much horror.
How is that situation different from what is currently happening in that situation when you give the order to approach or orbit the interceptor? "I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
342
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 13:08:00 -
[15] - Quote
I've been thinking about this, and I can see how intercepting course setting could be really hard to make for ships, because of the high max speed advantage the "target" may have. But I still think that it could be a good thing on missiles, and maybe drones. What do you guys think? "I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
174
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 13:49:00 -
[16] - Quote
Calculations are already made every server tick. Perhaps they are a simpler formula than what is proposed, but if CCPs client can't handle calculating a relatively simple formula, they are in the wrong business.
This NEEDS to get done. My buddies who recently started playing the game always ask why the ship acts like a ****** when they hit the orbit button. The response is that ccp is too lazy to put a decent flight computer into the game.
There is no legitimate excuse for it being so bad other than poor management, which if you read the mittani, we all know exists.
We also know why links are so overpowered; they want people pumping that extra 15 a month because CCP is having major financial trouble, due solely to incompetent management, but I digress. |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
206
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 13:55:00 -
[17] - Quote
I would also like to see this applied to missiles. An odd behavior of them at high speeds where both parties are involved is to snake around in a haphazard and frankly embarrassing way that wastes upwards of 50% of their range.
Granted this is less of an issue if you're sitting still firing at what's kiting you, but in any larger pvp setting, especially against multiple targets, slowing down is NOT an option, and having the missiles 'turrets' actually do their job and track trajectory before firing the missiles that can use a pittance of computing power to perform basic physics, and intercept the target much closer to their ACTUAL range, instead of meandering about my screen as I watch with bemusement and alarm.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |