Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aerilis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
34
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 10:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
Are awesome! I thought it was a trivial change and didn't give more than a "meh" when I saw it in the patch notes, but actually flying up to one of these things in game is a totally new experience. Maybe it's because we're so used to the flat stargates, but seeing a large object break the ubiquitous plane of everything else in Eve and feeling the slight bit of vertigo that came with that made me really feel like I was in a true 3D space, whereas before I felt like I was on a more or less flat surface where I was allowed to move up and down a little.
CCP, please apply this treatment to stations as well! Make them oriented with the surface of the planet/moon they're orbiting :) |
Halcyon Ingenium
Warm Holes
37
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 10:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Aerilis wrote:CCP, please apply this treatment to stations as well! Make them oriented with the surface of the planet/moon they're orbiting :)
That would actually be pretty cool.
People say things like: "Oh, you make so much money. What do you need any more for?" Well, actually, *****, I never asked for your opinion. I'll let you know when I have enough money. -Gene Simmons |
Liam Mirren
27
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 10:39:00 -
[3] - Quote
Aerilis wrote:CCP, please apply this treatment to stations as well! Make them oriented with the surface of the planet/moon they're orbiting :)
That would severely mess up people's bookmarks, not sure you'd want to go there.
Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude. |
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
317
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 10:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
That sounds nice, although I assume it would have strange results.
I also appreciate those stargates that are not on one "plane" but more spread out in 3D alot more now. I am always disappointed when I only align and warp but remain on the same "height" in space.
EDIT: and lets not a bunch of bookmarks someone made stand in the way of the game. Everything in eve can be lost so so can bookmarks. - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Finarfin
Selectus Pravus Lupus Transmission Lost
5
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 10:57:00 -
[5] - Quote
I really dislike this "you mess up people bookmarks" argument. Things change constantly in an MMO and thats a good thing. Do these people also dislike the hybrid changes because they have to change their fits now?
Such a simple change like reorienting the station could possibly add so much immersion. I was undecided about the stargate realignment but after doing some trips through space I was amazed that it adds so much more immersion and breaks this rather stupid twodimensional plane feeling EvE always had. |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
201
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 11:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
yes, keep this momentum going!
also, why are all asteroid belts a flat horseshoe shape |
Zagdul
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
217
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 11:05:00 -
[7] - Quote
I think the orientation of anchored objects needs to be re-worked in general and when it's done, it should be done with the forethought that eventually orbiting solar systems would be planned. While I'd be awesome to have orbiting celestial bodies in space and to have star-bases and outposts to be more orientated with them, there was a post a long time ago stating that the sheer mathematics involved in developing this would be astounding.
While I'd love to see this happen someday, the resolution to the bookmarks issue would be that instead of a bookmark being a relationship of where your ship is in a solar system, you'd need to make it relative to the position of the nearest object in space. For example, an instant undock would be relative to the station, not to a X/Y axis of a grid in a solar system. Hopefully we're getting to the point in technology where supporting a more realistic environment is plausible in EVE.
The amount of variables to make much of these types of things possible in a video game are astounding when you begin to think of all the moving parts necessary to make it work.
It's not Rocket Surgery |
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
207
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 11:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
Aerilis wrote:Are awesome! I thought it was a trivial change and didn't give more than a "meh" when I saw it in the patch notes, but actually flying up to one of these things in game is a totally new experience. Maybe it's because we're so used to the flat stargates, but seeing a large object break the ubiquitous plane of everything else in Eve and feeling the slight bit of vertigo that came with that made me really feel like I was in a true 3D space, whereas before I felt like I was on a more or less flat surface where I was allowed to move up and down a little.
CCP, please apply this treatment to stations as well! Make them oriented with the surface of the planet/moon they're orbiting :)
+1 Yes please. Bookmarks are easy to redo.
The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
207
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 11:09:00 -
[9] - Quote
Skippermonkey wrote:yes, keep this momentum going!
also, why are all asteroid belts a flat horseshoe shape
^^ This too, would be way more fitting to have them in a random distribution in a zone.
The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |
Marcus Wilde
Meat Shields
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 11:11:00 -
[10] - Quote
Skippermonkey wrote:yes, keep this momentum going!
also, why are all asteroid belts a flat horseshoe shape And why can't we shoot and blowup asteroids too?
Tears + Bucket = Win |
|
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
201
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 11:14:00 -
[11] - Quote
Thorn Galen wrote:Skippermonkey wrote:yes, keep this momentum going!
also, why are all asteroid belts a flat horseshoe shape ^^ This too, would be way more fitting to have them in a random distribution in a zone.
How about, for lack of a better word, a 'modular asteroid' ?
It has multiple 'layers' (like the onion in Shrek :P )
To get at the inside layers (of innevitably better ores) you have to mine away at the outer layers
So, you could have a large asteroid almost like a diced onion, needing to remove the outer layer, or pieces of it to get to the better pieces in the middle.
To an extent this will hinder the 'cherry picking' that goes on in belts
It was just an idea. These could also/instead be 'meteors' that have to be scanned down to be mined? |
Real Poison
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
66
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:23:00 -
[12] - Quote
what's next? celestials actually orbitting their suns?
bookmarks and grids relative to celestials?
afk ships slowly descending their orbit and smashing into celestials when they're below escape velocity?
or in 10 years even taking cover behind an asteroid/other ship? using a titan as meatshield? |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
306
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
Aerilis wrote:Are awesome! I thought it was a trivial change and didn't give more than a "meh" when I saw it in the patch notes, but actually flying up to one of these things in game is a totally new experience. Maybe it's because we're so used to the flat stargates, but seeing a large object break the ubiquitous plane of everything else in Eve and feeling the slight bit of vertigo that came with that made me really feel like I was in a true 3D space, whereas before I felt like I was on a more or less flat surface where I was allowed to move up and down a little.
CCP, please apply this treatment to stations as well! Make them oriented with the surface of the planet/moon they're orbiting :)
It is pretty cool, I agree.
Also, if you look carefully and site down the stargate's "tube" axis, you can spot the star you will be going to. It'll be a little brighter than most others in the background, and if you look in that exact spot on the background after landing, you won't see it any more.
It's a nice little touch :) This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
216
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:33:00 -
[14] - Quote
I've noticed that some of the gates actually point the wrong (as in opposite) direction. If you watch the flash of light, it shoots off away from the destination system, not toward it. |
Red Templar
Raging Ducks Goonswarm Federation
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:47:00 -
[15] - Quote
Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping. For Love. For Peace. For Honor.
For None of the Above.
For Pony! |
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
317
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:51:00 -
[16] - Quote
Red Templar wrote:Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping.
Wouldn't the gravity that a station produce pull you with it? I am no rocket scientist, but I though that is why astronauts don't get flung from their orbiters when orbiting the planet during spacewalks. - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
216
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:58:00 -
[17] - Quote
Red Templar wrote:Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping.
You've never heard of geostationary orbit then?
EVE is a space game, not a space simulator. Orbiting stations and celestials would add precisely nothing to the game. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
306
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:58:00 -
[18] - Quote
Ciar Meara wrote:Red Templar wrote:Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping. Wouldn't the gravity that a station produce pull you with it? I am no rocket scientist, but I though that is why astronauts don't get flung from their orbiters when orbiting the planet during spacewalks.
No. The mass of a space station, while large, would not be enough to create appreciable gravity.
Astronauts don't get flung from their orbiters because everything is moving at the same speed around the planet. This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
306
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:59:00 -
[19] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Red Templar wrote:Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping. You've never heard of geostationary orbit then? EVE is a space game, not a space simulator. Orbiting stations and celestials would add precisely nothing to the game.
Geostationary orbit means your orbit keeps you over the same spot on the planet... your orbit speed matches the rotation of the planet.
It doesn't mean you hold still in space. This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |
Red Templar
Raging Ducks Goonswarm Federation
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 13:14:00 -
[20] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Red Templar wrote:Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping. You've never heard of geostationary orbit then? EVE is a space game, not a space simulator. Orbiting stations and celestials would add precisely nothing to the game. you on the other hand heard of it. But thats the only thing you did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit
EDIT: Oh someone answered already. Nevermind.
And yes it would bring something to the game. It would be harder to camp the station(seriously, **** those idiots in Jita who think they are pvping), and would change undock battles. For Love. For Peace. For Honor.
For None of the Above.
For Pony! |
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
159
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 13:15:00 -
[21] - Quote
Red Templar wrote:Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping.
and the servers would grind to a screeching halt while calculating all the station's orbits in the whole EVE.
that's why everything in a system is fixed at that place, so that the servers don't need to calculate the X,Y and Z position of every "static" in the solar system.
tbh I think you would need twice the server capacity for that. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Red Templar
Raging Ducks Goonswarm Federation
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 13:18:00 -
[22] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Red Templar wrote:Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping. and the servers would grind to a screeching halt while calculating all the station's orbits in the whole EVE. that's why everything in a system is fixed at that place, so that the servers don't need to calculate the X,Y and Z position of every "static" in the solar system. tbh I think you would need twice the server capacity for that. Probably true. I dont expect this to be ever implemented. But these boards are full of dumb ideas, why not add another one? For Love. For Peace. For Honor.
For None of the Above.
For Pony! |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
306
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 13:23:00 -
[23] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Red Templar wrote:Make stations orbit the planet. Dont give a f*** if its turned one way or another. But stations have to orbit planet, otherwise they would fall. And to hell with bookmarks. And make its speed like 1km/s. That would reduce stupid dock/undock games and station camping. and the servers would grind to a screeching halt while calculating all the station's orbits in the whole EVE. that's why everything in a system is fixed at that place, so that the servers don't need to calculate the X,Y and Z position of every "static" in the solar system. tbh I think you would need twice the server capacity for that.
It's a cool idea, but Grimpak's answer is why they won't do it.
That and Goonswarm would start bumping stations out of orbit and all over the solar systems. :) This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |
Wilhelm Riley
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 13:40:00 -
[24] - Quote
Tilting stations of match a planet or making stations orbit planets (forgetting that it's extremely impractical) would just serve to mess up docking and undocking. |
Lady Spank
GET OUT NASTY FACE
249
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 13:45:00 -
[25] - Quote
I'd just like to state that seemingly insignificant changes such as this actually make EVE feel fresh and new. (a¦á_a¦â) ~ Get Out, Nasty Face ~ (a¦á_a¦â)
Signature edited. Navigator. |
flank steak
Dark Nova Syndicate
118
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 14:29:00 -
[26] - Quote
As long as we are all so excited about immersion, I personally think we need some binary star systems. Being able to warp to two stars in a system would be awesome :D not to mention the looks.... Statistically binary star systems in our universe are pretty common, why are there non in New Eden? |
Leisen
Interrobang Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 14:34:00 -
[27] - Quote
Confirming little changes like this make a difference. Bittervets either truly don't care, or are afraid to admit it, but as for myself I like the small changes that enhance immersion. Always wondering why there's such a distinct sense of up and down in space... |
Louis deGuerre
The Dark Tribe Against ALL Authorities
79
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 14:40:00 -
[28] - Quote
Real Poison wrote:what's next? celestials actually orbitting their suns?
Actually, in the very early days of EVE, planets DID orbit the suns. It was removed as it was a lot of overhead and added little to the game mechanics I believe.
FIRE FRIENDSHIP TORPEDOES ! |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
201
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 14:41:00 -
[29] - Quote
Leisen wrote:Always wondering why there's such a distinct sense of up and down in space...
spaceflight in EVE takes place in solar systems
solar systems rotate around an axis
hence, 'UP' and 'DOWN' |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
201
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 14:42:00 -
[30] - Quote
flank steak wrote:As long as we are all so excited about immersion, I personally think we need some binary star systems. Being able to warp to two stars in a system would be awesome :D not to mention the looks.... Statistically binary star systems in our universe are pretty common, why are there non in New Eden?
THis was explained somewhere in RP terms that the stargates could only be 'anchored' or work in systems with one star. something to do with gravity |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |