EVE Search - Another idea for mitigating nano gheyness

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Another idea for mitigating nano gheyness

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mahn AlNouhm The Bastards	Posted - 2008.02.26 00:52:00 - [31] Edited by: Mahn AlNouhm on 26/02/2008 00:52:42 Quote: Er, why not? Because its counterproductive. The idea was about a game mechanic, not about my understanding of theory. Arthur: Fair enough. I do like where you're headed with the idea, though. Putting Nano fits on ice would provide an interesting set of challenges for the pilots. . . .
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2008.02.26 00:53:00 - [32] Originally by: DubanFP Mass is basically defined by an object's abillity to resist force and keep it's current velocity/direction, inertia. Don't forget mass also distorts space, thus creating gravity. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.26 00:53:00 - [33] Originally by: DubanFP Edited by: DubanFP on 26/02/2008 00:48:03 Originally by: DaJokr Mass...that has something to do with gravity I think, right? Space is 0 gravity last time I checked, so mass would be in effect...nothing 0.o You make me cry . -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:01:00 - [34] Originally by: Arthur Frayn But acceleration would make this take literally years of realtime to reach it. Ever played Microsoft Space Simulator? It was an old early 1990s game that dealt with relativity, realistic spaceship flight and the like. I once executed a flight to Mars from Earth, accelerating at 8 G's. It took me two days so I left my PC running when I went to school and overnight. Yes I'm a geek. But it was fun. Strange idea of fun ;) Anyway, tbh, while it would take forever to reach it, running over a grid at 15-20km/s would be easy to do presuming that ships have thrust levels which they presently have (or, accelerate as fast as now). Relativistic effects don't come to play at such velocities so we can happily ignore them and go 'special theory of what?' ;) Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Mudkest Ekliptika Engineers Ekliptika	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:02:00 - [35] Edited by: Mudkest on 26/02/2008 01:03:16 Originally by: Katrina Coreli And given that EVE functions like we are flying ships in a fish tank i think quibling about physics is neither here nor there yup, but I have no idear what's in the fishtank though, definetly not motor oil :) Originally by: DaJokr Mass...that has something to do with gravity I think, right? Space is 0 gravity last time I checked, so mass would be in effect...nothing 0.o no that's weight having to do with gravity. mass is constant, you have same mass here as you have in space and as you'd have on mars, but your weight would be different also, is it really mass that increases as you reach near light speed, or jsut the effect of it(to put it poorly) What I mean is, mass is constant (total of protons/neutrons/electrons) and just because you near speed of light doesnt mean you suddenly get more cause where would that come from? It doesnt just materialize as you gain speed adn then vanish is you decelerate right? ----- GIEV custom ship paint jobs! I want my hello-kitty-kessie!
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:04:00 - [36] Originally by: Mahn AlNouhm Edited by: Mahn AlNouhm on 26/02/2008 00:52:42 Quote: Er, why not? Because its counterproductive. The idea was about a game mechanic, not about my understanding of theory. Arthur: Fair enough. I do like where you're headed with the idea, though. Putting Nano fits on ice would provide an interesting set of challenges for the pilots. It would cause problems though to have no real top speed for any ship. but that would easily be countered by having to actively decelerate or you'd just fly past whatever you were aiming for. You could no longer fly at top speed in one direction, then slow down and make a U-turn. You'd spin out like a car oversteering. Maybe eve ships currently have "space tires" to keep a firm grip on the road or something. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:09:00 - [37] Originally by: Arthur Frayn It would cause problems though to have no real top speed for any ship. but that would easily be countered by having to actively decelerate or you'd just fly past whatever you were aiming for. Would be tons of fun if ships had, say, 200 times more damage output then now so instapops are possible. I so see BS fleets zooming at each other going 10-20km/s each and taking potshots at each other, ha ha ;) However, erm, yeah, that'd be kinda silly from a gameplay perspective ;P Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Mudkest Ekliptika Engineers Ekliptika	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:09:00 - [38] Originally by: Arthur Frayn You could no longer fly at top speed in one direction, then slow down and make a U-turn. You'd spin out like a car oversteering. Maybe eve ships currently have "space tires" to keep a firm grip on the road or something. would explain why eve feels so "flat" yes there is "up" and "down" but not much, pretty much everything is "left/right/forward/backward" but hardly ever "up" or "down" but that's cause everything ahse to stay close to the "road" or the "tires" won't work anymore ----- GIEV custom ship paint jobs! I want my hello-kitty-kessie!
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:10:00 - [39] Originally by: Cpt Branko Anyway, tbh, while it would take forever to reach it, running over a grid at 15-20km/s would be easy to do presuming that ships have thrust levels which they presently have (or, accelerate as fast as now). Also true, but they'd have to slow themselves down by turning around and decelerating for an equal amount of time. What's the benefit of going 20 kms when you end up screaming off into the distance, unable to web your target because you accelerated too much? -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:18:00 - [40] Edited by: DubanFP on 26/02/2008 01:19:25 Originally by: Mudkest would explain why eve feels so "flat" yes there is "up" and "down" but not much You do realize that a lot of things tend to be flat right? Rotating masses like our solar system and our galaxy tend to flatten over long periods of time because they rotate "think centrifugal force". It's actually quite realistic to have the galaxy semi-flat. Even the Earth has a small bulge around the equator because of this effect. P.S. You guys act like the ships can only have engine thrust foward & backwards rather then a myriad of turning and other directional thrusters. ___________ Desolacer> Who the heck gives YOU the right to ruin it for others buy blowing them up. Zaqar> CCP
Mahn AlNouhm The Bastards	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:22:00 - [41] Quote: 1st writing off the members of this board off as a "gaggle of geeks" does not bide well for what little credabillity you had left. 2nd Einstien must be rolling in his grave. Don't look up the slightest bit of info and use it to suit your needs without looking up even the slightest bit of information. This is just horrible, really REALLY horrible... Don't mess with things beyond your understanding. For the good of us all, PLEASE!! 1. I never wrote anyone off. The "gaggle of geeks" comment was an admittedly lame joke and an over generalization, but there was a point to it. I intended to preemptively address people not unlike yourself, who are eager to point out how wrong other people are while not addressing the main thrust of the idea I put up for consideration. 2. There's absolutely nothing wrong with making assumptions and drawing inferences from incomplete information. If I were well versed in the theory of relativity, I'd be better equipped to talk about how it would apply to game mechanics, sure, but I'm more than qualified to use my deficient understanding of Einstein's theory as a starting point for improving the game. It's called "creative thinking". Consider Einsteins theory as inspiration for my idea, rather than the idea itself. . . .
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:24:00 - [42] Edited by: DubanFP on 26/02/2008 01:26:13 Originally by: Mahn AlNouhm 2. There's absolutely nothing wrong with making assumptions and drawing inferences from incomplete information. It's called "creative thinking". No... no it's not at all. Not in this sense. You don't need to study physics, but "creative thinking" sort of assumes you at least have some sort of basic idea what you're talking about even in the slightest bit. ___________ Desolacer> Who the heck gives YOU the right to ruin it for others buy blowing them up. Zaqar> CCP
Mahn AlNouhm The Bastards	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:34:00 - [43] Quote: No... no it's not at all. Not in this sense. You don't need to study physics, but "creative thinking" sort of assumes you at least have some sort of basic idea what you're talking about even in the slightest bit. Which I have. It's pretty arrogant for you to assume that I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about at all. Regardless, your dismissive treatment of not just my idea, but others in this thread is unwelcome. If you want to join the discussion and contribute, by all means, but if you're going to be elitist, smug, and rude then join a bridge club and leave the rest of us alone. I don't mind you calling out blatant misinformation, but please, at least try to stick to the spirit of the conversation here. It's called courtesy. . . .
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:37:00 - [44] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/02/2008 01:38:04 Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/02/2008 01:37:22 Originally by: DubanFP Edited by: DubanFP on 26/02/2008 01:26:13 Originally by: Mahn AlNouhm 2. There's absolutely nothing wrong with making assumptions and drawing inferences from incomplete information. It's called "creative thinking". No... no it's not at all. Not in this sense. You don't need to study physics, but "creative thinking" sort of assumes you at least have some sort of basic idea what you're talking about even in the slightest bit. He did have a basic idea of what he was talking about. He understands that an object's mass increases as it accelerates to a higher speed. He just didn't take into account at what speed this effect becomes significant. If you're going to keep criticising him for his idea, come up with your own at the same time. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:38:00 - [45] Originally by: Arthur Frayn If you're going to keep criticising him for his idea, come up with your own at the same time. That assumes that there's a problem to start with. ;-) -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Mudkest Ekliptika Engineers Ekliptika	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:39:00 - [46] Originally by: DubanFP Edited by: DubanFP on 26/02/2008 01:19:25 Originally by: Mudkest would explain why eve feels so "flat" yes there is "up" and "down" but not much You do realize that a lot of things tend to be flat right? Rotating masses like our solar system and our galaxy tend to flatten over long periods of time because they rotate "think centrifugal force". It's actually quite realistic to have the galaxy semi-flat. Even the Earth has a small bulge around the equator because of this effect. P.S. You guys act like the ships can only have engine thrust foward & backwards rather then a myriad of turning and other directional thrusters. yes, but also missions, stargats and stations are pretty much all in that plane, and even inside missions themselves things are usualy "flat"(apart from few exeptions) as for the thrust aprt, yes it IS possible, but there are some engineering problems with that, unless you can think of another way to move your ship around then the current action=reaction princible(burn soemthing, jetison the gas to move). To be able to acelerate/decelerate forward/backward/sideways with the gas jets you'll need same size exhaust in alldirections. meaning you'll need ducts going from your engines to all those jet-nozzles. And as the gasses move around those ducts theye will loose part of the energy due to turbulation in the ducts, haveing to take turns and what not so you'll allready wont be able to acelerate in all directions as fast. Not to mention those ducts need room so your ship gets bigger(bigger target), and those ducts make your ship heavier meaning less acceleration(F=M*a still applies in space) so to counter act that you need a yet bigger and heavier engines. Off course you could put 6 engine pairs on your ship, 1 pointing in each direction, but then 3 to 5 of those engines will not be operating at any time(no point blowing both backwards and forward at same time, jsut uses fuel and adds more stress to your ships interior without increasing acceleration) so being jsut dead weight needing to be moved around and lowering acceleration(and also makes you a bigger target again) ----- GIEV custom ship paint jobs! I want my hello-kitty-kessie!
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:42:00 - [47] Edited by: DubanFP on 26/02/2008 01:42:44 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Arthur Frayn If you're going to keep criticising him for his idea, come up with your own at the same time. That assumes that there's a problem to start with. ;-) -Liang This 100%. ___________ Desolacer> Who the heck gives YOU the right to ruin it for others buy blowing them up. Zaqar> CCP
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:49:00 - [48] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Arthur Frayn If you're going to keep criticising him for his idea, come up with your own at the same time. That assumes that there's a problem to start with. ;-) -Liang In that respect, I'm guilty of pushing my own agenda. I see the problem as spaceflight in Eve being too unrealistic. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
Ariel Dawn Beets and Gravy Syndicate Rare Faction	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:51:00 - [49] How about this idea? It's based on using the already available counters: Neutralizers Thermodynamics/Overloading Interceptors ECM/Tracking Disruptor Rapier/Huginn/Hyena Faction Webs Skirmish Warfare Link Or perhaps fitting something other than a plated tank so you have some mobility against a nanoship. 200-250 DPS tanked will let you ignore a Vagabond. Shoot a Curse/Ishtar's drones. Heck, the only nano-ships that are even remotely hard to deal with are Sacrileges (poor defense against fast frigates) or Zealots (high range/DPS, but no frigate defense at ALL and a weak buffer). Frankly, I'm surprised you aren't suggesting that CCP changes speed to "This ship is traveling in excess of 2500m/s and is not a frigate. Your ship suddenly explodes." If everyone and their dog is flying nano-ships, THEN PERHAPS IT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA TO USE A COUNTER.
HarderThisTime	Posted - 2008.02.26 01:52:00 - [50] Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 25/02/2008 23:32:33 Originally by: Mahn AlNouhm Damn, I really seem to have drawn out the trolls today. So you know, I don't fly in 0.0, so the beef I have is limited to mechanics that are abused and unbalanced. I wasn't trolling. Honestly, the last thing that Eve really needs is more "conditional" or random mechanics. Eve is a sandbox, and an idea like this is very much an artificial limitation on the sandbox. -Liang I agree that artificial limitations is dumb, but your post is equally as dumb. CCP has nerfed sand before. Remember no stack nerf days?
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2008.02.26 02:00:00 - [51] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/02/2008 02:01:06 Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/02/2008 02:00:47 Originally by: Ariel Dawn If everyone and their dog is flying nano-ships, THEN PERHAPS IT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA TO USE A COUNTER. A counter-argument to your statement is that if everyone and their dog is flying nanoships, then the counters available are just not good enough against them. If they were, then the nanofit would lose its FOTM status by now. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.26 02:07:00 - [52] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/02/2008 02:01:06 Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/02/2008 02:00:47 Originally by: Ariel Dawn If everyone and their dog is flying nano-ships, THEN PERHAPS IT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA TO USE A COUNTER. A counter-argument to your statement is that if everyone and their dog is flying nanoships, then the counters available are just not good enough against them. If they were, then the nanofit would lose its FOTM status by now. That or everything else that's ever been good has been overly beaten to hell with the nerf stick and the nanoship is the only thing that's left with any dignity left. ___________ Desolacer> Who the heck gives YOU the right to ruin it for others buy blowing them up. Zaqar> CCP
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.26 02:13:00 - [53] Originally by: HarderThisTime I agree that artificial limitations is dumb, but your post is equally as dumb. CCP has nerfed sand before. Remember no stack nerf days? Well, they nerf things all the time - but I'd just as soon that they nerf things naturally through adjusting attributes rather than introducing yet another set of artificial rules. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2008.02.26 02:22:00 - [54] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/02/2008 02:22:34 Originally by: DubanFP That or everything else that's ever been good has been overly beaten to hell with the nerf stick and the nanoship is the only thing that's left with any dignity left. Dignity? I see no dignity in being impossible to kill while getting a permanent web/scram on someone while waiting for your gangmates to arrive to finish off the poor hapless soul. I do see the effectiveness of it, however. Eve's not about dignity though. It just means everyone not in a nanofit has to fly a battleship so they can fit the heaviest possible neut at all times. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.26 02:34:00 - [55] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Dignity? I see no dignity in being impossible to kill while getting a permanent web/scram on someone while waiting for your gangmates to arrive to finish off the poor hapless soul. I do see the effectiveness of it, however. This is the definition of an interceptor, and is also the role clearly defined for the Stabber and Vagabond. Quote: Eve's not about dignity though. It just means everyone not in a nanofit has to fly a battleship so they can fit the heaviest possible neut at all times. BC's can defend themselves pretty well against a lone HAC. 2 or more HACs and it was the gang that killed them. Regardless of nano or not, they were going to die. Also, medium guns track nano HACs just fine. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.26 02:47:00 - [56] Edited by: DubanFP on 26/02/2008 02:53:40 Edited by: DubanFP on 26/02/2008 02:49:11 Originally by: Arthur Frayn Dignity? I see no dignity in being impossible to kill while getting a permanent web/scram on someone while waiting for your gangmates to arrive to finish off the poor hapless soul. They have crappy DPS and limited by the fact that they are only really usefull in gangs. The entire role of the ceptor is to be able to hold ships down for the gang safely. It promotes teamwork which is good compared to some of the other things we've had. You should have seen some of the ECM ships a couple years ago, or the nano battleships of old. Then there's the pre-nerf nosferatu. Everyone had at least 1 nosferatu, EVERYONE. Of course don't even get me started on Sensor Dampeners. They were all over-nerfed only to find themselves replaced by the next setup. Honestly I can name a ship & setup that blows nanoships out of the water in effectiveness. Of course if I told you that then it would just become the next hype. ___________ Desolacer> Who the heck gives YOU the right to ruin it for others buy blowing them up. Zaqar> CCP
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2008.02.26 02:50:00 - [57] Originally by: Liang Nuren This is the definition of an interceptor, and is also the role clearly defined for the Stabber and Vagabond. You are correct about interceptors with their tackling bonuses, but nowhere in their descriptions are the Stabber or Vagabond described as tackling ships. They're described as hit-and-run cruisers. They just happen to be effective at tackling as well. The players clearly define the role of those cruisers as tacklers. Therefore, I won't mind if their speed gets nerfed so hard that they can be consistently hit by guns and missiles because it's not contrary to the role CCP intended for them. Originally by: Liang Nuren Also, medium guns track nano HACs just fine. Please show proof that medium guns can hit a nano-Vaga when they're being fired by anything other than a nanocruiser with dual web. Otherwise making declarative statements that embrace all contexts will make you look like a fool. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.26 03:55:00 - [58] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Please show proof that medium guns can hit a nano-Vaga when they're being fired by anything other than a nanocruiser with dual web. Otherwise making declarative statements that embrace all contexts will make you look like a fool. I will show this when I get home... until then, it's a bit too complicated a problem to work on while I'm at work! -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
0raven0 Point-Zero SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.26 04:48:00 - [59] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Mahn AlNouhm Okay, busted, I'm not a physicist. I tend to forget that I'm dealing with a gaggle of geeks. <insert flame here> BUT, I'm not so far off. I wasn't interested in the specifics of the theory, just the basic idea that speed and mass are interrelated. IIRC, we go faster than the speed of light when we warp, so we should all turn into warping black holes. -Liang Actually using a warp bubble you don't go fast at all. You move a few feet and you bring where you want to go to you. ie folding space. This is the concept of warp bubbles even if eve portrays it wrong. ------ Quote: tuxford: AT LEAST ITS SPEELED CORRECTLY tuxford: spelled* Oveur: rofl
Manic Smile Tau Ceti Global Production SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.26 05:27:00 - [60] I'd imagine their outrage at your idea has more to do with your suggested nerf on the holy nanofagotry than any real issue with your misunderstanding of physics.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.