Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Orboro Naheema
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.24 21:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
Problems:
EVE combat comes down to either a very exhausting game of rock-paper-scissors or a competitive social networking match with little in the way of decisions that can be made during the course of combat to alter the outcome.
Lack of GÇ£terrainGÇ¥
I included fleet control tools, as well as ship control, in this discussion as they are imperative if line of sight mechanics are implemented in EVE.
System:
* Ships of your class can block line of sight to the target you are attacking. * They must be within the critical distance for your weapons. * The critical distance for your weapons is calculated as a percentage of your weapons base range, optimal + 1x falloff, with your skill and relevant ammunition bonuses applied. * If this requirement is met, then your weapons do not fire until there is a clear line of sight to the target.
Fleet Formations:
The ability to for formations with greater ease would be necessary if these changes were implemented. This feature would only be one of many potential changes that would target the role of fleet commander in an effort to simplify current mechanics and add new ones with the hope of diversifying and rewarding the role of the fleet commander.
System:
* The fleet commander should be able to form and save fleet formations utilizing a new, light, and easy user interface before forming a fleet. * During a fleet, the commander should be able to broadcast formation plans to the fleet. * These could appear as waypoints in space that fleet members have to approach. * The fleet commander should have the ability to designate a center to their formation with ease (say by indicating a fleet member as the center). * The fleet commander should have the ability to dictate the orientation of the formation around the center. * When warping the fleet, the fleet should maintain the current formation.
Ship Piloting:
This mostly applies to smaller faster vessels, but the mechanics could be added for all ships regardless of class. Frigates should be able to utilize their maneuverability to take advantage of line of sight.
System:
1st control method:
* The pilot may choose to enter this control mode. * This mode changes the function of the mouseGÇÖs right key. * When the right key is depressed and held, a line will appear extending along the longitudinal axis from the bow of the pilotGÇÖs vessel. * When the mouse is moved from its initial position, the line will deflect in that direction and the ship will maneuver in that direction as well. * The distance that the mouse is moved will affect how radical the turn is. * Pilots should be able to modify the sensitivity of this control method in game.
2nd control method:
* Pilots should be able to create and save maneuvers within the user interface. * These maneuvers can be used at a later date using hotkeys. * The orientation of a maneuver may be rotated along a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the pilotGÇÖs ship when it is performed.
Changes to the Universe:
All POS shields, asteroids, NPC stations, player outposts, and other structures will block LOS completely for all modules except mining lasers. |
legwarmer
Air Cascade Imminent
17
|
Posted - 2011.12.24 21:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
Quote:System:
* Ships of your class can block line of sight to the target you are attacking. * They must be within the critical distance for your weapons. * The critical distance for your weapons is calculated as a percentage of your weapons base range, optimal + 1x falloff, with your skill and relevant ammunition bonuses applied. * If this requirement is met, then your weapons do not fire until there is a clear line of sight to the target.
This makes absolutely no sense
Please rephrase |
Orboro Naheema
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.24 21:47:00 -
[3] - Quote
I apologize if things were unclear.
Assume you are flying a battleship that is currently engaged in firing upon another vessel. Another battleship crosses between you and your target intersecting the line designating LOS to your target. If the second battleship is close enough to you, then your weapons are unable to fire until your LOS is clear. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
116
|
Posted - 2011.12.25 00:17:00 -
[4] - Quote
Orboro Naheema wrote:I apologize if things were unclear.
Assume you are flying a battleship that is currently engaged in firing upon another vessel. Another battleship crosses between you and your target intersecting the line designating LOS to your target. If the second battleship is close enough to you, then your weapons are unable to fire until your LOS is clear.
Now do this for five hundred battleships. Now do it for the same number on the opposing side. Now put out the fire that used to be a server. Line of sight targeting just isn't feasible. |
Orboro Naheema
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.25 00:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
It is limited. And it seems to be a relatively simple check. There is an invisible line that extends from your ship to your target. If this line intersects with another ships volume within the critical distance of your weapons, your weapons do not fire. It seems like this feature would be using data that is already tracked by the servers and the client. I may be incorrect though. |
Corina Jarr
Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built
109
|
Posted - 2011.12.25 18:37:00 -
[6] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Orboro Naheema wrote:I apologize if things were unclear.
Assume you are flying a battleship that is currently engaged in firing upon another vessel. Another battleship crosses between you and your target intersecting the line designating LOS to your target. If the second battleship is close enough to you, then your weapons are unable to fire until your LOS is clear. Now do this for five hundred battleships. Now do it for the same number on the opposing side. Now put out the fire that used to be a server. Line of sight targeting just isn't feasible. 1000 LOS checks could be done in less than a millisecond. The server already has to know where each ship is to display the same thing to multiple users. |
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies Fidelas Constans
167
|
Posted - 2011.12.25 22:51:00 -
[7] - Quote
This is wholly foolish and full of fail.
1: 1000 vs 1000 fights are stupidly insane..no one would get a shot off or disconn due to lag.
2: A reasonable solution is loss of los results in "Friendly fire" or "misfire'...you get in the way..you get your ass blown off....also results in serious issues *see point 1* (i do like this....it would be more realistic...but its problematic)
3: OP has never been in a large scale fleet fight...
Point 3 alone kills this proposal.
Not supporting. |
Nullbeard Rager
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 22:03:00 -
[8] - Quote
Drake Draconis wrote:This is wholly foolish and full of fail.
1: 1000 vs 1000 fights are stupidly insane..no one would get a shot off or disconn due to lag.
2: A reasonable solution is loss of los results in "Friendly fire" or "misfire'...you get in the way..you get your ass blown off....also results in serious issues *see point 1* (i do like this....it would be more realistic...but its problematic)
3: OP has never been in a large scale fleet fight...
Point 3 alone kills this proposal.
Not supporting.
I feel safe saying that no one in this game has been in a large fleet battle, this being a game and all...
If tranquility can handle it, why not do an LOS check?...pilots could have a simple switch for how their ships handle the check. Either hold fire until the designated target is clear or be a bozo and shoot a member of your own fleet. Be a lot more interesting than being one to two button wonders and would certainly require more discipline than a lolblob. |
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies Fidelas Constans
169
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 22:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
Nullbeard Rager wrote:Drake Draconis wrote:This is wholly foolish and full of fail.
1: 1000 vs 1000 fights are stupidly insane..no one would get a shot off or disconn due to lag.
2: A reasonable solution is loss of los results in "Friendly fire" or "misfire'...you get in the way..you get your ass blown off....also results in serious issues *see point 1* (i do like this....it would be more realistic...but its problematic)
3: OP has never been in a large scale fleet fight...
Point 3 alone kills this proposal.
Not supporting. I feel safe saying that no one in this game has been in a large fleet battle, this being a game and all... If tranquility can handle it, why not do an LOS check?...pilots could have a simple switch for how their ships handle the check. Either hold fire until the designated target is clear or be a bozo and shoot a member of your own fleet. Be a lot more interesting than being one to two button wonders and would certainly require more discipline than a lolblob.
You once again prove point 3.
I can pull goonswarm in here along with my alliance...they have been happily invading branch these days to make it even more clearer.
Care to try again?
EDIT: Heck..why bother asking...come up to branch and check out the fireworks... you can see for yourself. |
Orboro Naheema
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 23:18:00 -
[10] - Quote
It is not relevant, but I have been in large fleet battles. I have "been" in probably the largest fleet battle EVE has seen. The really amusing part is that I was once part of FCON. :P More importantly we are rapidly approaching the activation of the time dilation feature. I don't want to get my hopes too high, but I am carefully optimistic that this will make large fleet fights far more enjoyable. I really hate waiting 15 minutes, or more, for modules to cycle off while having no clue if they ever actually fired. The addition of LOS, as well as fleet formations, would add much needed strategy to fleet engagements. And before you say it, no I do not have any illusions that LOS and fleet formations alone will radically change the battle field in EVE, however it could be a starting point for more robust changes.
@Nullbeard Rager I currently lean towards a simple fail safe mode that denies you the ability to fire. It would seem to make sense that the manufacturers of your ships would not want fleet mates blasting each other apart accidentally. However the option to either follow the built in fail safe or disregard it does open up opportunities for some serious LOLS. Hmmm I am torn. |
|
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies Fidelas Constans
169
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 23:36:00 -
[11] - Quote
Orboro Naheema wrote:It is not relevant, but I have been in large fleet battles. I have "been" in probably the largest fleet battle EVE has seen. The really amusing part is that I was once part of FCON. :P More importantly we are rapidly approaching the activation of the time dilation feature. I don't want to get my hopes too high, but I am carefully optimistic that this will make large fleet fights far more enjoyable. I really hate waiting 15 minutes, or more, for modules to cycle off while having no clue if they ever actually fired. The addition of LOS, as well as fleet formations, would add much needed strategy to fleet engagements. And before you say it, no I do not have any illusions that LOS and fleet formations alone will radically change the battle field in EVE, however it could be a starting point for more robust changes.
Bull####.
Your an 1 year old plus toon NPC'er.... I seriously doubt you have any credence in what you claim..and even then no one would make this outlandish proposal making such clamis without some sort of proof hiding behind an alt.
even if you did...you still show a remarkable amount of ignorance.
You also have confidence in a system that has yet to be throughly tested....your lack of expernice is obvious. |
Orboro Naheema
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 23:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
Thank you for your replies, but I would request that you please respond with specifics. I would like to respond to your questions, but sadly you have provided me nothing substantive to rebut. |
Nullbeard Rager
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 23:58:00 -
[13] - Quote
Drake Draconis wrote:I think a person's experience in a game has something to do with the technical feasibility of their suggestion.
Alright well, good luck with that.
|
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies Fidelas Constans
169
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 00:15:00 -
[14] - Quote
Orboro Naheema wrote:Thank you for your replies, but I would request that you please respond with specifics. I would like to respond to your questions, but sadly you have provided me nothing substantive to rebut.
EDIT: Sorry @Drake Draconis
Nice cop out.
I'm challenging your experince and lack of obvious experince in game.
TLDR For those who lack the IQ - Post with your main or get out. |
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies Fidelas Constans
169
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 00:15:00 -
[15] - Quote
Nullbeard Rager wrote:Drake Draconis wrote:I think a person's experience in a game has something to do with the technical feasibility of their suggestion. Alright well, good luck with that.
Tell me about it.
I'm stuck behind a desk doing my job with little to no time to get invovled in gradiose epic battles but I've watched...studdied...yearned....wantted...maybe "lusted" for such things but alas must pay bills and care for my lovely wife.
But the point remains...I have enough comon sense to not make such assumptions without people giving me a great deal of insight into large scale battles. It's never as it seems and you end up fighting a number of problems...mass numbers..traffic...compliexty...a FC that expects you to pay attention.
And now your going to complicate this with the crap concerning of LOS.
Oh don't get me wrong...I get it..I think its great in reallity...but in EVE?
Your asking for pandoras box.
Snow balls chance in hell. |
Orboro Naheema
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 00:35:00 -
[16] - Quote
I would request that you provide specific, detailed arguments against the proposal at hand. What you have done is attack me. Who I am is irrelevant. The weakness of argument lies with you not I.
I shall attempt to distill your argument for you. It seems to revolve around server load and/or player response time under lag conditions. I would agree that these are potential killers of the idea if it were to be determined that they were severe enough. I do not believe that you, or I, have the technical expertise to make that call however, and I would leave this determination up to CCP developers. This mechanic might help with the server lag problem, assuming that the check itself does not negate the gains, by creating a scaling logistical cost to your fleet as it increases with size. As a fleet increases with size, the formation required to ensure that all fleet members have an unobstructed LOS to their targets would increase in volume and complexity. A slightly smaller fleet might be more desirable.
The ability to warp and maintain formation would make remaining in formation much less stress inducing, but you would still have to travel to the way points for the initial formation. I have even toyed with the idea of allowing the FC to automatically warp the fleet into a new formation with the added mechanic that if the intervening distance was not long enough members of the fleet would not arrive in formation. They would have to travel the remaining distance to their broadcast way points on their own resulting in a potential loss of DPS. |
Thredd Necro
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
90
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 00:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
Drake Draconis wrote:Nullbeard Rager wrote:Drake Draconis wrote:I think a person's experience in a game has something to do with the technical feasibility of their suggestion. Alright well, good luck with that. Tell me about it. I'm stuck behind a desk doing my job with little to no time to get invovled in gradiose epic battles but I've watched...studdied...yearned....wantted...maybe "lusted" for such things but alas must pay bills and care for my lovely wife. But the point remains...I have enough comon sense to not make such assumptions without people giving me a great deal of insight into large scale battles. It's never as it seems and you end up fighting a number of problems...mass numbers..traffic...compliexty...a FC that expects you to pay attention. And now your going to complicate this with the crap concerning of LOS. Oh don't get me wrong...I get it..I think its great in reallity...but in EVE? Your asking for pandoras box. Snow balls chance in hell.
It also would distract people from their blobs to actually have to keep track of line of sight and positioning in microcosm and most people who are out to massacre other people are mostly looking for minimal risk and effort despite all the complaints about how boring blob combat can be.
Agreed. Good idea in theory but perhaps not in practice.
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. - Douglas Adams |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
227
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 00:52:00 -
[18] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Orboro Naheema wrote:I apologize if things were unclear.
Assume you are flying a battleship that is currently engaged in firing upon another vessel. Another battleship crosses between you and your target intersecting the line designating LOS to your target. If the second battleship is close enough to you, then your weapons are unable to fire until your LOS is clear. Now do this for five hundred battleships. Now do it for the same number on the opposing side. Now put out the fire that used to be a server. Line of sight targeting just isn't feasible. 1000 LOS checks could be done in less than a millisecond. The server already has to know where each ship is to display the same thing to multiple users. That isn't really relevant. The problem is that the computer doesn't magically see the LOSs just because it has the location info. Currently the server propably only needs to know is the locked target is in range+can your shot reach that target+do you hit it. All other info is pretty static, so it doesn't need to be recalculated constantly. With LOS you need to calculate the flight path of every shot and compare it against all other objects in range to see if any of them cross that line. You've turned it from "check against the selected target when the gun is activated" to "calculate line of fire and compare it against all other objects in range when the gun is activated". It's a totally different scale of calculations compared to what we have now. In a fleet fight it's not going to be just 1000 extra checks it's going to be thousands of checks per ship or gun, if they are ungrouped. LOS only works in games where the number of players are low. It's the reason large scale combat, in the scale that EVE currently offers it, is impossible in all multiplayer games that have LOS.
It's also a can of worms because of the aggression rules. Depending on the exact choice it's either a huge cause of accidental CONCORDokkens or free ganking and can offer the possiblity to use neutrals to block ship guns, if the guns will simply refuse to fire. It raises problems with missiles too. Are you going to have the server calculate free flight paths for every missile or stop them from launching just because the direct line of fire is blocked at the time of the launch? Missiles are also entities, so are you going to be checking the LOS against them too?
Point being it's going to make current scale fleet fights totally impossible and cause several issues with the mechanics no matter how it's implemented. Maybe it could work if it only calculated huge structures or asteroids instead of ships, but LOS calculations on the scale you imagine would ruin the current game and the benefits just aren't worth it IMO. |
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
279
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 01:01:00 -
[19] - Quote
If anybody actually reads the OP's post and takes into consideration all that is proposed (and if they have a brain) they would realize that it would actually work and probably quite well at that.
What he is proposing is a mechanic that would not only bring in more of a tactical feel to the game but utterly change the way PvP is played today.
Formations would allow fleet commanders to adjust the fleet accordingly to allow the maximum number of ships to be able to hit targets without getting in the way of each other. As the opposing FC's counter adjust their formation to protect one ship or fire on another the other FC would have to do the same.
It would also start making people think about where they are going and where they are right then and there. Do I keep moving forward to get a better angle on that ship or do I move in to protect my buddy who is about to die?
This would also likely break up the blob mechanic of current fleets as nobody would want to be in large fleets with a less likely chance of being able to hit anything. They might break up into smaller multiple fleets part of the same operation. Flanking would then have a purpose for example. Sniper fleets might become useful again... EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX!
Support our boobies!-á[url]https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24221&find=unread[/url]
|
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies Fidelas Constans
169
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 01:14:00 -
[20] - Quote
No one should be making these proopsals until they have actaully legitimately participated in a large scale battle.
Until such time that has passed...don't expect anyone to support this.
Except those with garnd delusions of self proclaimed experince whom live in high sec or hide behind npc alts. |
|
Drake Draconis
Nexus Advanced Technologies Fidelas Constans
169
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 01:17:00 -
[21] - Quote
Thredd Necro wrote:Drake Draconis wrote:Nullbeard Rager wrote:Drake Draconis wrote:I think a person's experience in a game has something to do with the technical feasibility of their suggestion. Alright well, good luck with that. Tell me about it. I'm stuck behind a desk doing my job with little to no time to get invovled in gradiose epic battles but I've watched...studdied...yearned....wantted...maybe "lusted" for such things but alas must pay bills and care for my lovely wife. But the point remains...I have enough comon sense to not make such assumptions without people giving me a great deal of insight into large scale battles. It's never as it seems and you end up fighting a number of problems...mass numbers..traffic...compliexty...a FC that expects you to pay attention. And now your going to complicate this with the crap concerning of LOS. Oh don't get me wrong...I get it..I think its great in reallity...but in EVE? Your asking for pandoras box. Snow balls chance in hell. It also would distract people from their blobs to actually have to keep track of line of sight and positioning in microcosm and most people who are out to massacre other people are mostly looking for minimal risk and effort despite all the complaints about how boring blob combat can be. Agreed. Good idea in theory but perhaps not in practice.
Again....never said that it wouldn't be utterly fun or hillarious. Its irrational in the current system and how EVE Online functions in the context of very (not large or itty bitty) large scale fleet fights.
The whole reason behind time dialation is the primary reason for this being horrible...the server CANNNOT HANDLE IT.
Its slowing down time in-game to catch up to the clients requesting copious update requests.
If the OP had bothered to read the freaking dev'blogs you might actually learn something.
LOS is great in a funny friendly fire scenario,...but this is not reallity...this is not terran field space...its space.
And there's a-lot of it. |
Orboro Naheema
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 01:35:00 -
[22] - Quote
"Currently the server propably only needs to know is the locked target is in range+can your shot reach that target+do you hit it." You do not really know though, and neither do I. A line between you and your target already exists. You can see it by turning on your tactical overview. I do not know if my experience represents the norm, but I have experienced no noticeable lag when toggling the tactical overview on. Either this line is already present and not shown, or it takes a miniscule amount of power to generate.
I imagined a single line extending from the center mass of your ship. This sacrificed the realism of having individual LOS for every gun, but I did it for the server blades. The poor, poor server blades that might implode under the stress. Missiles would also sacrifice realism for function. Missile ships would use the same mechanic for calculating LOS as turret ships. I toyed with the idea of allowing missiles the ability to travel around large static objects like POS's, but the amount of math required for this would seem to be substantial. I also feared making cruise missile Ravens OP. So in short there would be a single line from your ship to your target.
"It's also a can of worms because of the aggression rules." This is the only serious problem that I have seen so far in this thread, and it is very serious. I apologize. I am used to fighting in low sec, wormhole space, and null sec. I have not fired a shot in anger in a while due to being disappointed in EVE, and I am pretty sure it has been over 3 years since I have fired a shot in anger in high sec. In short neutral shielding of targets in high sec warfare is a killer. You probably should have listed that first. I am going to have to ruminate on that one for a bit. I cannot see a way to negate the problem at this moment.
Thank you Destination SkillQueue for your additions to the discussion. I shall try and find a way around the high sec/concord problem and post it soon. |
Di Mulle
26
|
Posted - 2011.12.28 06:18:00 -
[23] - Quote
Orboro Naheema wrote:"Currently the server propably only needs to know is the locked target is in range+can your shot reach that target+do you hit it." You do not really know though, and neither do I. A line between you and your target already exists. You can see it by turning on your tactical overview. I do not know if my experience represents the norm, but I have experienced no noticeable lag when toggling the tactical overview on. Either this line is already present and not shown, or it takes a miniscule amount of power to generate.
For a purpose of server "knowing" whether you can shoot or not - no, this line does not exist now. And to "know" it server must cope with the dreadful "n square" problem. You do not need to know all the math and coding to understand that, it is very simple logic actually. It is amazing how many people still can't understand it though.
The line you are talking about is drawn by your client and evaluated by your brain. The server does not possess their computing power and needs to rely only on his own, for the sake of security.
The only thing we don't know without knowledge of all EVE innards is how much it will add to the existing calculations. Will they increase tenfold, or by a mere 10% because server already does so many things. But " n square " inevitably will be there.
CCP is unable to implement simpliest things. Like settting to hide signatures. So they sweep it under a rug . Children do that in their pre-shool years, CCP does it being adults. Probably because it is fearless enough. |
yumike
Eve of Madness
36
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 08:02:00 -
[24] - Quote
I'd very much like to see what you posted about too OP, I think it would add alot of depth.
"Not firing" due to line of sight is ridiculous however, Most certainly fire - friendly, neutral, or hostile be damned. Would add a brand new perspective to the game.
As destination pointed out though, In the event of missiles i'm sure they are given calculated routes at some point - It would become the same with guns however and there would be a ton more checks involved.
Imagine primary'ing a target thats clipped between 20 more ships. That's alot of junk for the server to try to sort through, and I frankly dont see it as feasible despite how much I love the concept and have thought about it for many years now. |
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
878
|
Posted - 2012.01.02 15:33:00 -
[25] - Quote
yumike wrote:I'd very much like to see what you posted about too OP, I think it would add alot of depth.
"Not firing" due to line of sight is ridiculous however, Most certainly fire - friendly, neutral, or hostile be damned. Would add a brand new perspective to the game.
As destination pointed out though, In the event of missiles i'm sure they are given calculated routes at some point - It would become the same with guns however and there would be a ton more checks involved.
Imagine primary'ing a target thats clipped between 20 more ships. That's alot of junk for the server to try to sort through, and I frankly dont see it as feasible despite how much I love the concept and have thought about it for many years now.
I suppose you could argue that missiles are "guided" and they would be able to menuever around obstacles to hit a target but then you may or may not have to account for the distance in that menuever around said object. Missiles would indeed be a little trickier to change. EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX!
Support our boobies!-á[url]https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24221&find=unread[/url]
|
Nullbeard Rager
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.02 18:50:00 -
[26] - Quote
yumike wrote:..."Not firing" due to line of sight is ridiculous however, Most certainly fire - friendly, neutral, or hostile be damned. Would add a brand new perspective to the game...As destination pointed out though, In the event of missiles i'm sure they are given calculated routes at some point - It would become the same with guns however and there would be a ton more checks involved.
Because no one needs to worry about fratricide/"friendly" fire in a game where no one really dies and people go through ships like addicts through crack, amirite?
(Also remember: Missiles CAN maneuver.)
|
Xander Hunt
17
|
Posted - 2012.01.15 13:29:00 -
[27] - Quote
Calculating to see whether a shot can be taken is rather easy.
- Do, and remember, the calculation of distances between you and all ships. - - http://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/geometry-solids/distance-two-points.php - - - - distance = sqrt(abs((x2-x1)^2+(y2-y1)^2+(z2-z1)^2))) - Then calculate the angle of the ships that are within radius of you and the ship you're going to shoot. - If all calculated ships are outside your line of site (Call it say one or two degrees) - - if the server decides if a ship is to be shot at, the server will either allow the shot and do the appropriate math, or force a "misfire" or some sort. - - if the client decides if a ship is to be shot at, the command to the server can be "turn off the gun" or just call "misfire"
Notes: - The calculation needs to only happen once every time a weapon is to be shot. - Calculating the ships within the radius of you and your target eliminates the extra calculation of angles. Since the ships outside the sphere of you and your target, its not in your line of site.
Now, the one thing I *CANNOT* answer is how much extra load this would be on the server. If the calculation were to happen client side, then this would have to be done once for every grouped weapon firing, then something can be sent to the server to say go/no-go on the shot. If this is run on the server, it has to be figured each time a weapon is fired. In 1000 ship fleet battles, it'd get pretty damned heavy as several ships may be firing on the same frequency.
Then, as mentioned, the problem with fuel propelled ammo is that if another ship wanders into range while said ammo is enroute to your target, how would that be handled? Personally, if the consideration that if a shot is taken, and someone gets in range, friendly or not, it should be a hit, but CONCORD wouldn't be called because your target wandered into range, and your shot shouldn't be considered an act of aggression since your target was something else. Exploitable? Possibly, but it'd be hard to do more than once.
Personally, I think it WOULD add some realism to this. I've not ever been in a massive fleet fight, but still seems like a cool idea. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |