| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Origim
   |
Posted - 2004.05.11 02:09:00 -
[1]
This is the most strange thing I've ever seen... in space, we're not traveling through any medium, so why do we need to incline left (to make a left turn) and right (to make a right turn) like fighter planes do?
Before you argue that "physics has no place in EvE," there is more to that than physics... it's annoying. Not only does it make inconvienient for travel, but the way Apocalypse (and some other ships) turn makes them look very toyish. 
--------------
 Posting Efficiency / Rank 1 / SP: 68542 of 256000 | 
|
Bella Verde
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 02:15:00 -
[2]
I think it would look silly if they just turned the way you say they should. I think battleships shouldnt be able to turn on a dime like they do right now either.. should need to make a wide turn. Cruisers and indy's too.
|
Muthsera
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 02:29:00 -
[3]
It has to do whit the game engine.
And how the system of movement is.
I whould guess the turn takes the shortes route.
Hench, it focus on direction, speed and angle.
I whould guess that route is in a bow and on 45 degrees.
It must be some form of code that dictates the ship to be right side up at all time. (maybe due to player comfort)
It's a bit better to orient oneself when you don't have the full 360degrees movement.
SoonÖ
|
Marias
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 02:44:00 -
[4]
The space shuttle doesn't turn on a dime. Those crazy Russian re-entry vehicles whose name I've forgotten don't turn on a dime. I'm no physics genius, but I recall that the general priciples of velocity do in fact hold true in space. So, if you're going 6 au/s, you're not going to turn on a dime.
The engines on EVE ships are mounted in the rear. To suddenly dash off to th' larboard, without turning, ye'd need yonder huge friggin' engines mounted staboard. And if you were already moving forward, you'd end up going in a diagonal direction anyhow. 
It would, of course, be extremely fun to see a ship in EVE with omni-directional engines. Sure, the ship would be ugly as hell, but imagine the hilarity. 
-----------------------------
To the lesser of two weevils! |
Lucas De'Thal
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 02:48:00 -
[5]
let's not have them turn at all. just have them facing 1 direction the whole time and it can fly sideways, backwards or whatever
______________________________________________
Hellmar > sorry for the attitude, playing a n00b character through the current state just left me a bit bitter
dev chat: Mar 18, 2004
hellmar> "you lot are just so clever you have a good history for out smarting us :-S "
dev chat: Feb 12, 2004 |
MiloMorai
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 02:54:00 -
[6]
You seem to be forgetting "attitude" jets. The shuttle has them. But regarding velocity and turning you go in line from A to B and your jets fire and you start pointing at C while still travelling towards B. Unless you are at a stop you will keep travelling in that line until your main engines make you start heading off in a diff direction but adding in the original line towards B.
The motion of the ships looks like they used airplane physics rather than spacecraft physics due to difficulities such as mentioned above.
|
Enraku Reynolt
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 03:57:00 -
[7]
remember, most pilots train in atmospreic jets, you did too
and since you dont have to worry about conserving fuel, you never bother training to turn without the waste of power tilting involves
enjoy your RP reason
------------------------------------------------
Do not let the world change you.
Change the world
Here's everything I know about war: somebody wins, somebody loses, and nothing is ever the sa |
Muthsera
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 05:41:00 -
[8]
erm.. not to get under anyone skin or anything.
But you know that picture whit a sigar named:
This is not a sigar?
Well. This is like that.
Becus that picture was a "picture" of sigar, not an actuall sigar.
So this is a game whit an game engine.
It hasn't actually have anything to do whit space or actual fysics of the world.
But the dynamics of the game engine dictates how the ship moves and how things get done.
I must say though. I was about to start down that line whit sentral gravity of the ship and all that.
But then I suddenly recalled that it's just modeled after that behavior of the world and not every small detail is included in the game engine.
SoonÖ
|
hatchette
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 06:57:00 -
[9]
Don't compare spaceflight to airplanes.. it's totally different.
Compare it rather to hockey player.. he has some momentum and he can turn freely with almost no force even when he's going 30km/h. He will only have to apply substantial force when he'll want to change direction.
Velocity should not have any (even slightest) impact on turning speed. Attitude thrusters' power (as someone before me mentioned) and ship's mass should.
However.. velocity should have impact on speed of changing direction of movement.
|
Orion Yoda
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 07:24:00 -
[10]
If you want an example of a game with true newton physics that try Indepence War 2.
In reality, the ship would turn to align it's main engines on the new direction of travel and then fire engines.
So when travelling in a straight line and wanting to turn left, the ship would turn to orient engines to right and forwards, i.e. nose pointing back and left. then fire engines. the ship will then slowly cancel out forward momentum while generating movement in a left direction.
You say you are lying. But if everything you say is a lie, then you are telling the truth. You cannot tell the truth because everything you say is a lie. You lie, you tell the truth ... but you cannot, for you lie.-- Norman the android, "I, Mudd", stardate 4513.3 |
PaulAtreides
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 07:54:00 -
[11]
I agree with Origim... It would give EVE a lot more Zer0-G feel if this stopped tilting into turns. Its just wasting time and detracting from the Space feel of things.
I remember back in Beta, people where complaining that you couldn't do barrel rolls with your ships. If I am not too far wrong, this would be the happy-medium that was decided apon.
Want to work for me? |
NeoMorph
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 08:09:00 -
[12]
Edited by: NeoMorph on 11/05/2004 08:12:40
The thing with Eve is it is Science Fiction... CCP made the game and they make the game mechanics...
If we were getting picky over the physics I would be more concerned with the fact that if you turn a MWD off you slow down...
What I came up with for roleplaying purposes is this... The MWD creates an inertial sump where it pushes all the inertia into subspace while the ship is accellerating and when the MWD cuts off the inertia of the ship returns from the subspace sump and therefore slows the ship to its pre-MWD burn. The normal impulse drive does similar...
The reason for this is that if you accellerated the way the ships do without the inertial sump you would still be squashed flat in your pod as the engines push the rear of the ship thru the very heavy mass of the rest of the ship.
There you go... Eve Technobabble at its finest 
-------------------------------------------
<Stavros> the first motor bike i ever rode
<Stavros> was a honda gold wing
<Ak-Gara> hah
<Stavros> |
PaulAtreides
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 08:18:00 -
[13]
Edited by: PaulAtreides on 11/05/2004 08:20:20
 Originally by: NeoMorph
Edited by: NeoMorph on 11/05/2004 08:12:40
The thing with Eve is it is Science Fiction... CCP made the game and they make the game mechanics...
Science Fiction...
Arthur C. Clarke a famous writer in this genre was the person who thought up of the idea of satellites. The thing about all good Science Fiction is that is has Science mixed into it.
Want to work for me? |
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 08:36:00 -
[14]
Originally by: NeoMorph
Edited by: NeoMorph on 11/05/2004 08:12:40
The thing with Eve is it is Science Fiction... CCP made the game and they make the game mechanics...
If we were getting picky over the physics I would be more concerned with the fact that if you turn a MWD off you slow down...
What I came up with for roleplaying purposes is this... The MWD creates an inertial sump where it pushes all the inertia into subspace while the ship is accellerating and when the MWD cuts off the inertia of the ship returns from the subspace sump and therefore slows the ship to its pre-MWD burn. The normal impulse drive does similar...
The reason for this is that if you accellerated the way the ships do without the inertial sump you would still be squashed flat in your pod as the engines push the rear of the ship thru the very heavy mass of the rest of the ship.
There you go... Eve Technobabble at its finest
Execllent work there  
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Jadrut
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 08:53:00 -
[15]
How about this:
Because, because, because of the wonderful wizard of oz
|
Balazs Simon
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 09:38:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Balazs Simon on 11/05/2004 09:40:50
About the medium, and why the ships slow down, or need countinual engine power to move:
It is simple. Because the warp drive.
The warp drive use gravimetric waves to create the sub space buble.
When it is not active it still intereact with this waves, and it want to stay at is minimum energy leve ie. try NOT MOVE.
Your warp drive is a mini gravimetric well, you sitting in the middle. When you fire up your normal engins, you try to come out from this well. When you engage your warp drive you "fell" into the well.
Simple as that.
Why you need to bank in turns?
Simple, the engines mounted on the rear. When you turn, the side engines generate different thrust, so you "slide" on the gravimetric well generated by your stand-by warp drive. Thats why you do not need additional thrusters on every side of you ship to manouvere.
WOW I'm good
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 11:53:00 -
[17]
I still prefer Jash's explanation that your ship rolls into a turn because of space cats, which infest the ship's engine and eat certain specialised parts of the intertial damping system, causing the ship to pitch sideways whenever it tries to turn in a particular direction.
In short - IT'S A GAME. If you want an absolutely pure simulation of movement, badger Microsoft to produce a space-shuttle sim. It won't be any fun though, because it'll take you three months to get from one planet to the next, and seventy thousand years to reach the next star system from ours. (And that's being optimistic).
_______
"Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age." |
Galacton
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 12:43:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Galacton on 11/05/2004 12:46:44
If the physics were truely realistic the game would be insanely difficult. In space there is no atmosphere and hence no friction, so once at speed a ship would carry on for ever at the speed in that direction never slowing down. In order to slow down to a halt to approach on an object in space requires the ship to re-orientate to the opposite direction and fire its thrusters for an equal ammount of time. Re-orientating (but not turning) is possible on a dime. But to travel in a different direction first requires the current velocity and direction to be canceled by applying equal and opposite thrust first - only then can you travel in the desired direction. If you ever played lunar lander - its kind of like that but without gravity. Its mystifying how the ships even slow down - they have no forward facing thruster and they never re-orientate to slow down. But with a lot of things like this - there are convenient storylines to explain these short-comings.
|
Galacton
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 12:48:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Baldour Ngarr
I still prefer Jash's explanation that your ship rolls into a turn because of space cats, which infest the ship's engine and eat certain specialised parts of the intertial damping system, causing the ship to pitch sideways whenever it tries to turn in a particular direction.
In short - IT'S A GAME. If you want an absolutely pure simulation of movement, badger Microsoft to produce a space-shuttle sim. It won't be any fun though, because it'll take you three months to get from one planet to the next, and seventy thousand years to reach the next star system from ours. (And that's being optimistic).
"badger Microsoft to produce a space-shuttle" - they already did some years ago, suprisingly called Space Shuttle Simulator.
"It won't be any fun though, because it'll take you three months to get from one planet to the next" - exactly it sucked badly.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |