| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lia Gaeren
Pole Dancing Vixens
   |
Posted - 2008.06.12 11:06:00 -
[1]
Seen a lot of threads about the change in hulls for those frigates lately, and it got me wondering not so much about specific hulls, but elements on an individual ship design which just wind you up?
Megathron (and to a lesser extend the Dominix although I do like the nautilus shape) - no wonder they are so bloody slow, they are too front-heavy!
(insert most Caldari hull models here) - off-centre propulsion. Don't know why this one winds me up, but a good few of the ships shouldn't be able to fly in a straight line with the way their drives are configured. |
Hanneshannes
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 11:10:00 -
[2]
The asymetric design of the Caldari ships annoy me somewhat although I must say, they fit into the backstory with them being the most advanced... blabla...
One that really kills me is the Raven, as you pointed out, that ship would fly and endless circle because it has most of its drives and the biggest on the right side (seen from behind) |
shavada
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 12:45:00 -
[3]
Do you guys know what vacuum means and how it works? :)
|
H Lecter
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 13:03:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: shavada
Do you guys know what vacuum means and how it works? :)
A vacuum is a volume of space that is empty of matter. Consequentially there is no aerodynamic drag AND NO SOUND. Thus when there is sound there cannot be a vacuum  |
Cobra Ball
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 13:06:00 -
[5]
It doesn't matter whether its in air or in a vacuum. Engine thrust and their position around the space craft dictate where the ship goes. Take a look at pictures of the Gemini, Mercury, Appolo, or the Soyuz space capsules. They have thrusters packs placed around the craft. They are there to move the space craft around the ships' X, Y, Z axis. (its much easier to see in pictures than to explain in text)
What vacuum provides is the ability to build a ship that is not aerodynamic. You can build a cube, a cylinder, or whatever is efficient for the overall design.
Anyway, asthetically I hate the way the Moa looks. I am a Caldari, but I am going to start cross training Gallante. I just like the way their ships look. Well, except for the Dominix. Its shape looks like something my son left for me in his diaper this morning. |
Zaknussem
The Ironbreakers
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 13:07:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Zaknussem on 12/06/2008 13:08:29
The reason we have sound in space is because the Jovians (the funny little blokes that gave us the POD technology) found it to be better for the capsuleers to have simulated sounds to reflect events in space.
You know, to have our sense of hearing be of some use to us. Like the BACON program did.
Oops...
There is still no solid explanation given, however, for why spaceships fly like they're submerged in water instead of being in deep space. There is no inertia in space, our ships should not come to a stop when we kill the engines. |
Lia Gaeren
Pole Dancing Vixens
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 16:19:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Zaknussem
There is still no solid explanation given, however, for why spaceships fly like they're submerged in water instead of being in deep space. There is no inertia in space, our ships should not come to a stop when we kill the engines.
Actually I think there is ONLY inertia in space - once you stop applying a force to an object it will continue to move under its own inertia until the end of time unless another force acts upon it. I suspect it's for reasons of playability and balance. Elite II had real world inertia and it added a massive amount of complexity to navigation to the point where I didn't want to play it any more. Think of a nano ship's acceleration - without an upper limit on velocity, it could continue accelerating until it was almost going as fast as the speed of light (assuming also that relativity was implemented ;).
Easy solution - simulate the drag effects of atmospheric flight in space ;)
|
Jaronel
Abysmal Bottom Line
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 17:51:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Jaronel on 12/06/2008 17:55:00
Edited by: Jaronel on 12/06/2008 17:53:49
I personally get a kick out of the fact that you can hear every weld and bolt ping and pop while trying to bank my Impel at full speed, and yet when stationary, she can spin like a top. 
Edit: Also, I think what you mean to say instead of there is only (or is no) Inertia in space, is that there is no friction in space (Although there can be, of course, in certain areas). So while a ship could accelerate to its max speed, and remain at that speed indefinitely, it would by no means simply continue accelerating forever, as its thrusters only put out so much oomph. (And that, my friends, is totally a word!)
--------------------
We love rocks. ISKx0 |
Cmd Grothag
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:14:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Jaronel
Edited by: Jaronel on 12/06/2008 17:55:00
So while a ship could accelerate to its max speed, and remain at that speed indefinitely...
Actualy, without friction in space there is no such thing as max speed. |
Jaronel
Abysmal Bottom Line
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:20:00 -
[10]
Aha, so it is. Apparently as long as you have fuel to burn, you can accelerate. |
Cmd Grothag
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:24:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Jaronel
Aha, so it is. Apparently as long as you have fuel to burn, you can accelerate.
Mhm, and stopping requires fuel too. Also in space, changing direction is a *****. |
Aenea Saito
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:34:00 -
[12]
The whole off center thing with caldari ships gets me every time I break out my destroyer. I keep thinking its going to make a hard bank to port.  ! |
El Libre
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:40:00 -
[13]
I find that most ships are asymetrical, and that really bothers me. Thorax and Omen are good expamples. Most ships have something diffrent from one side to the other on them and that drives me nuts. |
Cmd Grothag
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:49:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Aenea Saito
The whole off center thing with caldari ships gets me every time I break out my destroyer. I keep thinking its going to make a hard bank to port. !
Hm well, in space, all that actuality matters is ships center of mass. If we consider volume vs surface, all ships would be spherical. Asymmetrical ships would be logical if you need to, for instance place nuclear reactor or some other dangerous **** away from living quarters. Anyways, I appreciate artists effort to make four different ship races. |
Aenea Saito
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 19:16:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Aenea Saito on 12/06/2008 19:16:40
True, and if they really were real ships the problems of off center mass can be taken care of with vectored thrust.
|
Louis deGuerre
Chimera Tech
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 12:39:00 -
[16]
There is a game that does model space physics and combat accurately.
Frontier - Elite 2
I alwyas loved it when I tried to do it manually and approached a planet at 20000 km/s desperately trying to break or evade and then smashing into the ground.
Not as easy as you might think.
--------------------------------------------------
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles - Sun Tzu |
Kusha'an
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 12:55:00 -
[17]
Doesn't Jumpgate also use real physics in space? |
J'Mkarr Soban
Proxenetae Invicti
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 13:44:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Zaknussem
There is still no solid explanation given, however, for why spaceships fly like they're submerged in water instead of being in deep space. There is no inertia in space, our ships should not come to a stop when we kill the engines.
I came up with my own one: the ships use inertialess drives.
|
Zirconium Blade
Ass Pounding Space Monkeys
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 15:25:00 -
[19]
Suprise! Spaceflight in EVE cannot be explained by our laws of physics/current understanding of physics.
Shocker. |
Gantrithor105
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 06:01:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Lia Gaeren
Originally by: Zaknussem
There is still no solid explanation given, however, for why spaceships fly like they're submerged in water instead of being in deep space. There is no inertia in space, our ships should not come to a stop when we kill the engines.
Actually I think there is ONLY inertia in space - once you stop applying a force to an object it will continue to move under its own inertia until the end of time unless another force acts upon it. I suspect it's for reasons of playability and balance. Elite II had real world inertia and it added a massive amount of complexity to navigation to the point where I didn't want to play it any more. Think of a nano ship's acceleration - without an upper limit on velocity, it could continue accelerating until it was almost going as fast as the speed of light (assuming also that relativity was implemented ;).
Easy solution - simulate the drag effects of atmospheric flight in space ;)
Something I find INCREDIBLY interesting. Because there is no friction, a ship in a circular orbit only need apply force towards the center of the orbit. This means an orbiting craft would point towards the center and would theoretically hit a ship sitting still (or moving relatively slowly) almost as if it was just sitting in front of you, regardless of your speed, while the ship being orbited would have almost no ability to track you in your orbits.
While it's not real, it does make it nice that a nano ship has to deal with tracking as well, at least to some degree.
|
Wen Johen
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 08:57:00 -
[21]
brutix is also very front heavy
but i think these ships were designed to be like intimidating and stuff, gallente overcompensating for ... for a few other things
|
eskr
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 10:25:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Zaknussem
Edited by: Zaknussem on 12/06/2008 13:08:29
There is still no solid explanation given, however, for why spaceships fly like they're submerged in water instead of being in deep space. There is no inertia in space, our ships should not come to a stop when we kill the engines.
there IS inertia in space - this is exactly why ships should have been continuing flying ahead when engines shut off. There is no AIR FRICTION in space (cause there is no air)
|
Elhina Novae
Sky's Edge
deadspace society
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 11:07:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Zaknussem
Edited by: Zaknussem on 12/06/2008 13:08:29
There is still no solid explanation given, however, for why spaceships fly like they're submerged in water instead of being in deep space. There is no inertia in space, our ships should not come to a stop when we kill the engines.
No.
There is Inertia in space. Too be simple and not go all scientific in here, Inertia is what decided how fast you can accelerate. In a real life aspect there is a reason too why our space cowboys are presured with loads of G-force when accelerating in a spacecraft = Inertia. If we could completely nullify Inertia you could reach the Speed of Light instantly, which if we speak in a real life aspect again, would take years and years of acceleration, because of Inertia; wouldn't be wise too go beyond 1G for the pilots and the spacecraft would crumble by a acceleration too extreme.
Somebody set up us the bomb |
Dagas Hunter
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 16:35:00 -
[24]
I'm the same way, every time a fly one of the many asymmetrical ships in EVE it just feels wrong. I think the designers has done a great job of not just ripping off other sci-fi ships and making them look unique, but my brain simply doesn't like it. I'm one of those people who needs a lamp on the left side of the bed if there is one on the right side simply for the sake of symmetry in the room.
|
Weeka
Tetragrammaton
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 20:03:00 -
[25]
The raven is flying backwards tbqh
|
Ethersong
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 22:39:00 -
[26]
You know that, as their in space, ship/engine configurations mean nothing. As space is a vacume there is nothing, at all, no drag, no friction... so you could have a ship with one engine on a wing and it'd still fly properly (steering it would be impossible though). In space you could have any shape you liked, e.g. a huge care-bear shaped raven for mission runners :)
|
Weeka
Tetragrammaton
|
Posted - 2008.06.15 06:33:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Ethersong
You know that, as their in space, ship/engine configurations mean nothing. As space is a vacume there is nothing, at all, no drag, no friction... so you could have a ship with one engine on a wing and it'd still fly properly
Actually no .. it's not even about friction or vacuum at all, it is about inertia.
If you take a boomerang shape in space, and mount a jet engine to it's outer wing, you would simply end up with a spinning boomerang.
|
Daan Sai
HAZCON Inc
|
Posted - 2008.06.15 12:25:00 -
[28]
As has been mentioned elsewhere, New Eden is filled with nearly clear oil, and we all fly around in submarines, (or is that suboleals?). You know its true!
|
Zortiander
Zortiander Magic Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.06.15 17:28:00 -
[29]
Heya all!
OK, I'm an aerospace engineer, so here is how it goes:
Inertia and such
Inertia is only a factor of an item's mass and the accelleration put on that item. Inertia will act exactly opposite (i.e. in the opposite direction) of the force vector applied to the item. It does not matter if it is braking, steering or accellerating.
Drag and such
Space has drag, but only very little, so it is a technical question. Space also has a number of other effects, such as forces by photon wind (yes, photons (i.e. light) are particles with an impulse, which they transmit to spacecraft; this effect can be measured, see the Pioneer missions). There is also dark matter, there are graviton waves and finally nebulas etc., all of which tend to create friction. Technically however, you can assume that friction stops to be significant at about 400 to 1000 km above Earth's atmosphere.
Accelleration
You can accellerate for an infinite amount of time, however your maximum speed is limited by the laws of the Relavistic Theory from Einstein. In fact, the mass of your ship grows as you accellerate, such that the effect of your thruster diminishes, to the point where your kinetic energy cannot be raised any more by your thrusters. You need infinite energy to reach the speed of light.
Off-balance engines
Any force applied to an object creates a momentum based on its distance and force vector direction in relation to the item's centre of gravity. For instance, any force going through the centre of gravity does not produce a momentum; any force vector going besides it, creates a momentum equal to the force multiplied by the closest distance to the item's centre of gravity.
So, it does not matter where and in which medium you are (vacuum, space, water, air): any off-centre engines create a momentum, effectively turning the ship.
Movement in space
Simplifying you can assume in space (and far away from any gravity source), that when you do not actively fire thrusters, the sum of the vector forces on your ship is null. So, when you fire thrusters, you change the impulse of your ship, against the inertia (dependent on mass) of your ship. The faster you go, the more force you need to accellerate more, until you hit your maximum speed (in an infinite amount of time).
Sorry, you can't really type formulas here, but any physics book & site should give you enough background. You'd need the laws of Newton, a bit of Einstein and some general physics on accelleration and forces. And most of what I wrote here is not exact in a sience term, but is an easy explanation.
Cheers,
Zortiander
P.S.
To the original poster: I love the Gallente ships as a whole, but my single one preferred is a fitted Vagabond with ACs.
|
Foulque
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:39:00 -
[30]
Just plain horrible:
Moa
Caracal
Celestis
Exequror
Dominix
Brutix
All Minmatar
Perfectly nice ships ruined by some ******** growth ruining symmetry.
Omen
Coercer
Cormorant
There's lots more. I'm baffled every day as I look at ships which have some great designs and obviously come from a talented design team. Then the same team who makes great looking ships like the prophecy and the Myrmidon turn around and drop crap like the Dominix and the Moa.
/confused 
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |