| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
FedEx Guy
   |
Posted - 2007.02.15 13:05:00 -
[1]
I expect alot these issues will only have be experienced by those who have piloted very large ships such as capitals, however there are still concerns that need addressing. Ships can be affected unrealistically by objects vastly disproportionate to their own size and mass. Here are some examples you may find odd:
Dreadnought moving at 10% speed gets bumped from behind by a frigate at full speed. Dreadnought ends up doing close it's full speed that would have normally taken an age to accelerate to. I've used this to successfully 'insta-align' and warp a capital ship. In practice the frigate should be bouncing off with no discernable affect on the ship with hundreds of times its mass.
Freighter moving at half speed collides into a stationary frigate. The frigate barely moves but the freighter bounces in the opposite direction faster than it's stop speed. In practice the massive hull should push smaller ships out of it's way with a minor speed reduction.
Carrier undocks from a station to find a corpse or wreck right on the undock point. Collision detection registers them in contact, and the carrier cannot accelerate. The capital must fly at a very specific angle to get away from the corpse. In reality a corpse should be sent flying with zero effect on the cap ship.
A Typhoon (or similar battleship) fitted with nanofibers and an MWD can bump a capital ship with more than ten times it's mass at very high speeds. I've managed to get well over 3km/s in a Thanatos after being bumped by a BS. Even with the mass penalty from using an MWD, a carrier has twice the value of the battleship. It's almost seems as if the calculation has the numbers the wrong way around when the heavier, stationary ship ends up moving faster than the light, mobile vessel that rams it.
|
pshepherd
Caldari
Dark-Rising
Fallen Souls
|
Posted - 2007.02.15 18:33:00 -
[2]
Yup, it would be nice if this was fixed.
|
Zygdriel 2
|
Posted - 2007.02.15 20:18:00 -
[3]
/signed
|
Vahn Ironfist
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 09:56:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Vahn Ironfist on 27/02/2007 09:52:42
Have smaller ships move away, not bigger ships. F*ck*ng ridiculous how bigger ships get pwn b/c small ships bump them to keep them from warping. If a smaller ship bumps into my carrier, have IT bump away, not my carrier.
|
Tiger313
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 12:10:00 -
[5]
Yeah: I've been wondering about this countless times, too. Another fine example: two mining barges mining at about 1000m distance of eachother. One barge launches drones, the other barge gets bumped all over the place by said drones. Now that's not as bothersome as capital ships being bumped into to keep them from warping out, but it makes ya wonder lol
|
Elaron
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 14:15:00 -
[6]
The games physics is simplified in many areas to lessen calculation load on the servers, because all of those calculations are done server side, because of the simple principle that clients can't be trusted with that kind of thing.
Collisions aren't the only place where this is evident. Other examples are:
1) Planets and moons don't orbit around the sun
2) Grossly simplified turret tracking mechanism
3) No line of sight issues for weapons (ie a Veldspar asteroid between you and your target doesn't prevent fire)
Ultimately, simplifying the physics model frees CPU cycles for things like more players per node which has been growing more important considering EVEs growth curve.
|
Gaogan
Gallente
Solar Storm
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 16:09:00 -
[7]
E=MV^2. So even though a frigate is much lighter than a carrier, when it is moving really, really, really fast, it contains just as much kinetic energy.
|
Nihilion Saro
Gallente
The Imperial Commonwealth
The Sundering
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:22:00 -
[8]
come on. there is no reason why my 100 million kg battleship should do a flip 360 when it hits a stationary corpse.. even if its a fat one that weighes 200 kg
I can live without the line of sight turret tracking issue, but the issue with the masses and momentum need to be fixed.
/signed
|
FireWynd
Caldari
Finis Lumen
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:29:00 -
[9]
Man it would make the game ALOT better if these physics were fixed. Signed 100x!
|
Rook Falcon
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:58:00 -
[10]
 Originally by: Gaogan
E=MV^2. So even though a frigate is much lighter than a carrier, when it is moving really, really, really fast, it contains just as much kinetic energy.
what happened when plane crushed into NY tower ? it exploded, what happens to frigate crashing into carrier? it should go BOOM. everyone knows that ccp drops lot of things to maintain the single shard ideology but that cause lot of silliness, if it would be close to reality you could ram your ships into others causing damage and destruction, how ever since this is not supported and would rise tons of exploits a simple and more elegant soulution would solve it; if your mass is less than of an object your collision is just ignored, simple condition, no extra load, no bombing capitals with shuttles.
|
Icome4u
IronPig
Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 00:49:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Icome4u on 28/02/2007 00:47:31
Edited by: Icome4u on 28/02/2007 00:45:32
Originally by: Rook Falcon
Originally by: Gaogan
E=MV^2. So even though a frigate is much lighter than a carrier, when it is moving really, really, really fast, it contains just as much kinetic energy.
what happened when plane crushed into NY tower ? it exploded, what happens to frigate crashing into carrier? it should go BOOM. everyone knows that ccp drops lot of things to maintain the single shard ideology but that cause lot of silliness, if it would be close to reality you could ram your ships into others causing damage and destruction, how ever since this is not supported and would rise tons of exploits a simple and more elegant soulution would solve it; if your mass is less than of an object your collision is just ignored, simple condition, no extra load, no bombing capitals with shuttles.
Ok time to take the noobs out like i take the garbage out. Every ship has a anti-colision system to prevent ships crashing into each other (said by CCP/DEV's). But the big problem with this system is that BOTH ships activate it. Well when a cruiser and a BC ram each other and both move out of the way it's good but when a frig ram a carrier or a mothership its BAD! Why? Because the small ships prevent the bigger ships from warping, hence why people get so **** about 'bumping'. I myself lost 2 carriers because of this stupidity (kept being bump which threw my alignment to warp off). Have the smaller ship move away and not both ships. It's plain stupid to have a carrier move around super fast to evade a shuttle or any smaller ship. It prevents the carrier from warping b/c his being bump around and it looks like ridiculous... Oh and also look into capital ships getting stuck on corpses and cans and prevent them from warping away... HAVE SMALLER OBJECTS MOVE AWAY FROM BIGGER OBJECTS. If both objects are the same size/mass have BOTH objects move away. I prefer being bump by a carrier or a mothership, than some noob in a shuttle or frigate tbh.
Oh and the E=MV^2....
IRL: Shuttle would get wtfpwnbbqsauce and then some.
IG: Carrier gets bump around at 1000ms speed and cant warp.
Oh btw... no it doesn't carry as much kinetic energy.. except if it goes what... 1000000ms... never seen a shuttle do that, and even if it did.. it would just blow up not causing that much dmg to the carrier (or just fly through it)... back to school for you.
|
Vlad Vaviloff
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 06:57:00 -
[12]
This should be fixed, of course. Using bumps to prevent ships from warping is like a legal cheat. But will it be actually attended to? Seriously doubt that. As i see it, this is a part of the game fundamentals, written and locked long ago. And you don't wanna mess with fundamentals, no siree.
|
Draco Ronan
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 09:53:00 -
[13]
Bumping of ship is petitionable.
|
Pinpisa Jormao
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 16:13:00 -
[14]
Signed.
Also make it so that if a frigate even touches anything bigger than another frigate, it will instantly go to structure. 
|
Bambi
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 08:28:00 -
[15]
It would be nice to have bteer collision detection, but I would prefer the cpu ticks were used to reduce lag.
One thing that has always buged me is the fact that you frequently warp thru planets and stations.
|
Chruker
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 09:12:00 -
[16]
I agree with this. Since the game already calculates the impact forces, it shouldn't be very hard to divide the forces based on the difference in mass, instead of just 50/50
-----
CCP: Please make ship loot to drop in a can next to the wrecks. |
4rc4ng3L
Gallente
adeptus gattacus
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 10:01:00 -
[17]
100% signed...
Although i think CCP did mention that this was going to be updated with the new graph engine or something, so i imagine it will be done eventually!
Death is the only true freedom, brought on by our own ignorance.... Welcome to the "free" world in which we live... |
Fluffernator
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 18:50:00 -
[18]
Im suprised noone else caught this.... LOL
Oh and the E=MV^2.
Kiinetic enery equals....
E=(1/2)*M*V^2...
This game doesnt have physics. Nothing about it is realistic. Still fun to play though :P
|
Mr Mozzie
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.03.02 12:47:00 -
[19]
If you are interested in real physics, may I recomend that you try a more realistic space simulator. Try to do something really simple like docking with the international space station.
The physics of eve are completely unrealistic, and for good reason. If eve used realistic physics it would be totally unplayable.
|
Plekto
|
Posted - 2007.03.02 17:01:00 -
[20]
Definately signed.
My #1 problem ahead of this, though, is that object don't block fire. It's lame in the extreme that you can't duck behind some asteroids or more likely, another ship if you are small enough. Almost every other game in existance calculates this, but EVE - well, the rocks might as well not be there until to run into them and then you bounce.
But this thing about physics - an easier way is to make ship collisions at more than 100% speed(ie - AB or MWD on) do real damage. Ie - a small bump while docking won't do anything, but if you have your AB or MWD on and you hit something, you take damage.
Now, this would of course mean that big ships could be taken out by ramming damage, but that's fair, since the ramming ship would blow up both the ship and the pod(insta-dead) - to do a lot of damage to you. Of course, a shuttle would either bounce or go "foom" like a single missile hit. ;)
The worst case of this that I've seen, though, is someone who anchored dozens of small cans at the exit point for a station(the type that spit out out the bottom). It was utter chaos - and don't tell me a can small enough to fit in a frig's cargo bay should do anything at all to even the shields of a BS, let alone a larger ship. I suppose you could also do this with corpses as well to create a semi-permanent "bubble".
|
Chruker
|
Posted - 2007.03.02 22:58:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Plekto
But this thing about physics - an easier way is to make ship collisions at more than 100% speed(ie - AB or MWD on) do real damage. Ie - a small bump while docking won't do anything, but if you have your AB or MWD on and you hit something, you take damage.
Now, this would of course mean that big ships could be taken out by ramming damage, but that's fair, since the ramming ship would blow up both the ship and the pod(insta-dead) - to do a lot of damage to you. Of course, a shuttle would either bounce or go "foom" like a single missile hit. ;)
this with corpses as well to create a semi-permanent "bubble".
Yeah, I would like to see the impact damage too.
-----
CCP: Please make ship loot to drop in a can next to the wrecks. |
AsiaFury
|
Posted - 2007.03.03 08:00:00 -
[22]
signed, stop the frig vs capital wars.
|
Breed Love
FATAL REVELATIONS
FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.03 23:25:00 -
[23]
/signed.
-----
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
At this time I am more disgusted by the player base then with the dev to be honest!
QFT!! |
Nian Banks
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.03.04 02:05:00 -
[24]
I doubt that adding a little realistic physics will cause too much of a problem, you don't need to go full realism, just a few minor fixes that would make the game a bit better.
Also for the while flying through a planet thing while in warping. Anyone seen "Cowboy Bebop"? Think of it like that, while in warp you can't be affected by or affect the real world, easy to explain and doesn't need a fix.
|
FawKa
Gallente
x13
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.04 15:48:00 -
[25]
I agree with bumping
But you guys that keeps wanting orbiting planets and so on.. just think a bit.. It is a game, we dont want it 100% realistic.
Think of EVE without sound effects 
|
hired goon
Infinite Improbability Inc
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.03.04 17:49:00 -
[26]
Originally by: FawKa
I agree with bumping
But you guys that keeps wanting orbiting planets and so on.. just think a bit.. It is a game, we dont want it 100% realistic.
Think of EVE without sound effects
The sound effects thing is explained in short story 'The Jovian Wetgrave'.
I will sign this, and also lump in the sillyness of capital ships wobbling around due to missile explosions.
-omg-
|
Xcom
Gallente
Genco
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.03.04 19:53:00 -
[27]
The worst mass bug is the missile effect. A titan canĘt shake that drastically when hit by puny missiles. Anything shaking that bad would cause massive structural damage. Nothing should shake cause of missiles. It was suppose to give some special effects and make the game more realistic. Instead it reminds you how computer simulated the ships are when they wobble like plastic hollow pixels.
|
MickyS
|
Posted - 2007.03.04 21:21:00 -
[28]
Edited by: MickyS on 04/03/2007 21:19:10
/signed
I would like to add the fact that there is no damn friction  (or not that much) in space so when going in a straight line and achiving full speed in any ship you should not be forced to keep the AB or MWD active.. Just take a look at a satelite orbiting our planet.. does it need fuel to run 24/7 just to keep up? no it doesn't..
yeah i know that gravity helps there but using fuel non-stop to keep the same speed in a straight line seems way off in space. this does not apply to turing since you need other forces to do that
|
Plekto
|
Posted - 2007.03.04 23:38:00 -
[29]
Why I added MWD/AB on as part of the fix was purely for gameplay purposes. This would keep people in tight formation/mining/warping as a gang/etc from damaging each other 98% of the time.
Running at something with your AB engaged until you hit it would be for only one purpose - to ram it.(note - shutting off your MWD 2-3km away and still going 3-4km/sec wouldn't do damage - it would have to be ON when you hit).
And it's easy to calculate - if MWD/AB=engaged on collision, calculate damage to both parties. If it's off, no change from how it is now.
|
Dario Kaelenter
|
Posted - 2007.03.05 12:36:00 -
[30]
Just as an afterthought ... our ships usually have shields so these may take a dip on collisisons but I think they would be sufficient to avoid any armor/structural damage to the ship ... unless it was a real high-speed front on collision 
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |