Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Andy Landen
The Illuminatii Mildly Intoxicated
19
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 18:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
We seriously need to have collision damage already. Not because of all those gankers who will complain about how they love bumping, but because a frigate flying into the side of a battleship at 4,500 m/s should be scraped off the side of the battleships hull with a spatula. It is ironic that a large projectile round does not bump the same battleship in a manner similar to how a frig bumps it.
In consideration of some problems with maneuvering created by collision damage, the ship should have a collision prevention option. When collision prevention is on, the ship automatically changes direction to go around obstacles in the way. When another ship sets a collision course, collision prevention will change course/speed to avoid the collision while continuing to its target/original course. When exiting warp, the ship's computer will calculate the nearest point safely away from any obstacles in the area.
Collision damage will be calculated based on the mass of the two ships and the relative speeds and directions of the two ships. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
72
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 19:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Andy Landen wrote:We seriously need to have collision damage already. Not because of all those gankers who will complain about how they love bumping, but because a frigate flying into the side of a battleship at 4,500 m/s should be scraped off the side of the battleships hull with a spatula. It is ironic that a large projectile round does not bump the same battleship in a manner similar to how a frig bumps it
In consideration of some problems with maneuvering created by collision damage, the ship should have a collision prevention option. When collision prevention is on, the ship automatically changes direction to go around obstacles in the way. When another ship sets a collision course, collision prevention will change course/speed to avoid the collision while continuing to its target/original course. When exiting warp, the ship's computer will calculate the nearest point safely away from any obstacles in the area
Collision damage will be calculated based on the mass of the two ships and the relative speeds and directions of the two ships. Sounds like a cool idea
Only problem I see is what happens in high sec? Places like Jita where possibly hundreds of ships are undocking at the same time. Impossible to avoid damaging your ship
currently they do not even collide in Jita let alone do damage. Just having bumping in Jita would be hilarious
Then again if collision is disabled in Jita then damage from bumping would also not be a problem
Would bumping be considered aggression in high sec if it did damage? Or should it be disabled in high sec like bumping in Jita? |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
195
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 19:30:00 -
[3] - Quote
Actually, that's such an obvious detail, bumping in Jita, (or around any station / outpost really), that it makes sense that some coordinator would automatically keep ships from banging each other that way in proximity to the place.
Gates are possibly covered by that logic, but with hostilities so common around them, maybe not.
Thinking about bumping, it does point out that for a game with so much risk in other areas, this sometimes stands out as having guardrails and padded walls by comparison. |
Tidurious
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
202
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 21:28:00 -
[4] - Quote
This will unfortunately never happen. Why?
It would require a complete and total re-design of the EVE code to the point that the DEVs would simply have to start over from scratch. There is NO WAY to implement this in the engine that already exists. I believe that work-arounds for placed like Jita could be found easily; however, it'll never happen considering the engine that is currently in the game.
That said, I would LOVE to see a frigate not pay attention, fly into the side of a freighter, and just go *poof*
|
Markus Reese
Debitum Naturae ROMANIAN-LEGION
97
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 22:11:00 -
[5] - Quote
I have another reason why collision damage would be bad. For how large alliances operates, it can be summed up in two words.
Dreadnought bowling |
Nariya Kentaya
Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking
168
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 00:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
Markus Reese wrote:I have another reason why collision damage would be bad. For how large alliances operates, it can be summed up in two words.
Dreadnought bowling that would be amazing....
and on another note, it would also be hilarious to see a drunk aussie flying his hound accidentally drift intot he side of an Ark off jita and kersplode along with all the bombs in his cargohold causing a chain reaction making the entire area go *poof*. would definetly be interesting to see EvE university try and make some "eve traffic laws" for high sec to cut down on the "unintantional DUI incidents" |
leviticus ander
CATO.nss
139
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 01:16:00 -
[7] - Quote
I did some math a while back on how much the rounds from railguns weigh. I think applied that energy output to a titan with all 8 high slots filled, and found that with every shot they would propel the titan in the opposite direction at about 80M/s, now imagine something like the tier 3 BCs firing their guns. they would be going near their warp speed backwards. and even if they were "recoilless" weapons, the force still needs to go somewhere and in the case of weapons like that, they just delay it and slow the dispersion with a series of springs and shock absorbers built around the barrel, firing mechanism, and the butt of the gun. basically, that wouldn't really work in eve space. as for the collisions, one, a frig would go splat, but if it were going 3-5km/s, it's not like the BS would just shrug it off, it would probably be either heavily damaged or even destroyed itself. same with something like a cane or mach slamming into a titan at 2+km/s. while it would be fun, would force you to have a lot more situation awareness, and could be an interesting game mechanic in some cases, it would also make eve as we know it impossible to play. |
Tarn Kugisa
Space Mongolian Pinked
51
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 01:46:00 -
[8] - Quote
IIRC there is a lore page about why ships don't damage each other. Real Caldari Hull Tank (And Win doing so) Support the EVE Version of Source Recoder! |
Kitt JT
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Nulli Secunda
30
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 04:35:00 -
[9] - Quote
I guess you've never been in a fleet battle.
Plus, would be rediculously hard to do/code
This honestly would ruin eve |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
113
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 06:51:00 -
[10] - Quote
Kitt JT wrote:I guess you've never been in a fleet battle. .... This honestly would ruin eve Actually this sounds like it'd fix blobbing perfectly. If you bring SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO many alpha maelstroms to a fight that they are bouncing around like a bunch of metal scraps in a tumble dryer then yeah they should take a bit of damage. This would force people to spread out a bit and add some tactical landscape to the fight rather than just two points in space each with 1000 dudes crammed on them.
As far as being hard to code I could definitely see that being an issue. EXCEPT that they already have the bumping code in place. Two ships going two speeds at two different angles with two different masses can collide with one another and bounce off each other. That's a lot of math going on already just fine.. It wouldn't be too hard to add a bit of damage tot hat formula.
The one BIG problem with collision damage is what happens in highsec. How is the game going to tell the difference between an accidental collision and collision ganking. Imagine someone taking a beefy battleship, like a max tanked dominix or typhoon or something, and then using it to go bowling through the jita undock. A triple trimarked, fully plated, and hardened dominix can take a few 5,000 hp hits and be just fine. But that's enough damage to pop most haulers. |
|
Daeva Teresa
Viziam Amarr Empire
54
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 07:26:00 -
[11] - Quote
It would not be hard to code. It would be actually really, really easy. Since we already have collision mechanic - bumping. Its simple as to switch this from ships bumps into ships do damage to each other. All the needed variables, vectors, etc are already there. People who writes **** about base code and writting code from scratch knows nothing about programing.
I dont know if this is good or bad idea. I can see this would add to the immersion and strategic aspects of the game. But the station problem with this must be adresed before this could be implemented.
In my oppinion collision damage and friendly fire is the only way to solve blobs. CCP really please dont use Upgraded, Limited, Experimental-áand Prototype in item names. It sounds like the item is actually worse than basic meta 1 item. Use Calibrated, Enhanced, Optimized and Upgraded. Its really easy to understand that the item is better than meta 1 and its also in alphabetic order. |
Asudem
Asen of Asgard
27
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 08:35:00 -
[12] - Quote
Lets just add a kamikaze command. With this command a ships properties like mass, volume ect. and its movement details will be calculated into pure damage of all types.
But on the other side I think it is a bad idea after all. Ppl would just use cheap ships to fly into their opponents instead of shooting them. It means collision damage would lead us to destruction derby like bumbing battles where guns are completly overrated. Nano-BCs with 100MN MWDs, keep in mind that a 100MN MWD adds 5.000 tons to the mass, would just fly into each other to create a massive rampage. Would that be fun? I would rather like to blast my opponent back into his/her pod where he/she came from. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
335
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 09:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
*undocks a freighter in jita*
*1000 killmails* |
SGT FUNYOUN
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion Bringers of Death.
47
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 09:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
***SCIENCE WARNING***
The reason that two ships don't do damage in a bump now is because of the Shields.
Two forces of the same exact type can have the ability to cancel each other out or repel one another.
Two shields (which are basically electromagnetic force fields) hit eachother, and bounce the ships away because they are repeling each other. The two shields polarize, and repel, much like two south poles on two magnets repel each other. There is nothing there to penetrate either shield as it is just two electromagnetic fields pushing eachother away.
The reason why bullets, missles, rockets, shells, charges, bombs, and laser beams (kinda obvious on the last one there) DON'T bounce off, is because they are not polarizing the field with a field of their own because these devices do not have a shield field to project.
It is a good thing your shield bounces you off of other ships, in reality, the shield would have been created to stop bullets from killing you, a side effect of this is the airbags and seat belts it basically replicates to keep your ship from splattering you all over the side of a station like a Mig in a tail spin during the Vietnam War. |
Kata Amentis
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc
55
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 13:21:00 -
[15] - Quote
on another front... two ships collide in high sec, one is destroyed... should the remaining ship be Concordokkened?
how does the code know which is an "aggressor"? was it the light kamikaze who got popped or the battleship sitting outside the undock popping all the light ships that got launched out the undock?
my mind is recoiling about how complicated the cases would need to be to cover that one Curiosity killed the Kata...
... but being immortal he wasn't too worried about keeping a count. |
SamTheOne
Concorded Saints Aerodyne Collective
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 10:38:00 -
[16] - Quote
Kata Amentis wrote:on another front... two ships collide in high sec, one is destroyed... should the remaining ship be Concordokkened? how does the code know which is an "aggressor"? was it the light kamikaze who got popped or the battleship sitting outside the undock popping all the light ships that got launched out the undock? my mind is recoiling about how complicated the cases would need to be to cover that one All collisions are accidents until proven otherwise. Problem solved |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
2046
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 11:54:00 -
[17] - Quote
SamTheOne wrote:Kata Amentis wrote:on another front... two ships collide in high sec, one is destroyed... should the remaining ship be Concordokkened? how does the code know which is an "aggressor"? was it the light kamikaze who got popped or the battleship sitting outside the undock popping all the light ships that got launched out the undock? my mind is recoiling about how complicated the cases would need to be to cover that one All collisions are accidents until proven otherwise. Problem solved
Hello CONCORD free ganking sprees. The until proven otherwise -part isn't a solution to the issue either, since no sane company is going to devote that much employee time to manually keep a game mechanic from ruining the game. Damage from bumping is never going to happen at this point. At most there might be a ramming option implemented, that targets a single ship and is considered as an aggressive action to utilize. |
SamTheOne
Concorded Saints Aerodyne Collective
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 12:00:00 -
[18] - Quote
Destination SkillQueue wrote:At most there might be a ramming option implemented, that targets a single ship and is considered as an aggressive action to utilize. Excellent idea. There should be several different size modules for this so you could sacriface a smaller ship to damage a bigger ship. |
Daeva Teresa
Viziam Amarr Empire
54
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 12:03:00 -
[19] - Quote
Yea ramming would definitely be more easy to implement, since no stations problems there. I would also like that if ramming enabled, it would ram all in the path. Im definitely for titan ramming blob of something :-) would be spectacular. CCP really please dont use Upgraded, Limited, Experimental-áand Prototype in item names. It sounds like the item is actually worse than basic meta 1 item. Use Calibrated, Enhanced, Optimized and Upgraded. Its really easy to understand that the item is better than meta 1 and its also in alphabetic order. |
SamTheOne
Concorded Saints Aerodyne Collective
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 12:06:00 -
[20] - Quote
Daeva Teresa wrote:Yea ramming would definitely be more easy to implement, since no stations problems there. I would also like that if ramming enabled, it would ram all in the path. Im definitely for titan ramming blob of something :-) would be spectacular. It would also probably cost you a titan, since both sides get damaged in the collision. |
|
Jace Errata
Lawlz Brawlz
139
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 16:22:00 -
[21] - Quote
WTB screenshot of an Erebus ramming a Ragnarok amidships. Stealth OST puns and blatant lies since 2009 Jace Errata on Twitter
One day they woke me up so I could live forever It's such a shame the same will never happen to you |
Andy Landen
The Illuminatii Mildly Intoxicated
19
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 17:45:00 -
[22] - Quote
Interesting development in this thread. Issues include shield theory, Jita undock, aggression, and code have all been addressed.
Shield theory of repulsive electric fields applies to a point, and may save this idea by allowing small bumps (small differences in velocity). Shields are not infinite and may be breached with sufficient velocity. One option is to apply shield damage to a small degree until the velocity overcomes the shield's strength. With smaller ships using smaller shields, that threshold would be lower than for ships with larger shields. Another option is to allow the shields to spare all collision damage until the threshold is exceeded and then apply the same damage to both ships. Assuming the theory that shields spare damage by repulsive means, many objects exist without shields besides weapons/ammo, including asteroids, jetcans, and pos guns.
I think that the Jita undock issue could be addressed with several different options for your consideration: a) Ships are timed to undock when the undock area is clear, b) Undock cameras allow players to see if an undock is clear. c) Multiple undock points allow a player to see and select a clear undock lane. Station camping becomes a little harder, too. d) Avoid collision option has the ship automatically steering to avoid collisions.
For aggression, obviously Concord cannot assign aggression and so Concord would force all ships entering HS to fly with anti-collision systems activated.
For the code, anti-collision systems may use functions similar to the "Keep at distance" or orbit functions, where the distance is based on the current velocity of the ship relative to each object, and on its inertia. |
Niko DelValle
Promethium Corp.
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 18:02:00 -
[23] - Quote
Um... no, this just wouldn't work.
Would be hilarious to watch though, hahahahaha |
geouss
Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 18:06:00 -
[24] - Quote
hey guys, i agree with this fully. also it would help is objects were solid so u can hide behind asteroids while u call for backup ^_^ |
geouss
Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 18:07:00 -
[25] - Quote
and punish idiots would block your line of fire |
geouss
Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 18:16:00 -
[26] - Quote
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:***SCIENCE WARNING***
The reason that two ships don't do damage in a bump now is because of the Shields.
Two forces of the same exact type can have the ability to cancel each other out or repel one another.
Two shields (which are basically electromagnetic force fields) hit eachother, and bounce the ships away because they are repeling each other. The two shields polarize, and repel, much like two south poles on two magnets repel each other. There is nothing there to penetrate either shield as it is just two electromagnetic fields pushing eachother away.
The reason why bullets, missles, rockets, shells, charges, bombs, and laser beams (kinda obvious on the last one there) DON'T bounce off, is because they are not polarizing the field with a field of their own because these devices do not have a shield field to project.
It is a good thing your shield bounces you off of other ships, in reality, the shield would have been created to stop bullets from killing you, a side effect of this is the airbags and seat belts it basically replicates to keep your ship from splattering you all over the side of a station like a Mig in a tail spin during the Vietnam War.
Not to mention it would be a real pain in the tail to have just bought and fitted a 3 billion ISK ship, ride out of the station, and have the Jita traffic jam splatter it into a fire ball even before your station exiting screen downloaded and hit your computers processors.
You can't fly like an aircraft simulator in EVE Online, THAT alone is one of the best reasons I can give for a NO to your OP; simply put, you can't fly AROUND anything else, thus you would never leave the station because you would blow up on the first glitchy broken pixel you saw.
this is actually the solution to ramming. if the ship has shield then it should repell a high speed projectile easier (similar to mechanic in mass effect with shield taking damage). i am more interested in the solid objects mechanic being used to counter the blobbing factor. and it would also give the miners a fighting chance if they use the asteroid fields to deflect some of the missiles/projectiles that are used on them.
it would also force some ppl to do actual manuveuring in the game instead of just speed tanking and armor/hull tankingdamage. |
ElQuirko
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
505
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 18:52:00 -
[27] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:
I've seen the idea of ramming damage in a sort of vague way floating around, and I've thought it too. Watching one of the EVE trailers where a Nyx smashes through some sort of station wall reminded me of it just now...
Wouldn't it be awesome/OP (depending on your opinion) if capitals could, if under enough pressure, ram other capitals for damage? I gave it some thought, and came up with this:
Skill - Kamikaze If a capital pilot has reached a critically low level of hitpoints (e.g. 10% armor remaining, or just into structure), the skill would give them a right-click option to "kamikaze" into a target. The rightclick would align them to a target, start a 15s warmup period of the engines, after which all locks on it would be broken, and then fly at a velocity determined by the pilot's skill (135% of max velocity for level 1, 160% for level 2, 200% for level 3, 245% for level 4, 275% for level 5) into the target. The damage would be determined by the momentum of the object (mass * velocity) divided by the kinetic resistance of the enemy's shield and, if breached, the enemy's armor. However, due to my calculations showing that a capital hitting another capital creates billions of damage, the damage will be determined by 1/20,000th of mass * velocity.
Take, for example, a Thanatos.
The Thanatos pilot is going down, his tank has failed and there's an enemy Nyx flying directly ahead of him. The Thanatos has a mass of 1,163,250,000 kg, which divided by 20,000 makes it 58,162kg, and this pilot has Kamikaze at level 3. Therefore, his base velocity of 75m/s becomes 150m/s. This amounts to a momentum of 17,448,750,000 kgm/s. Theoretically, the enemy nyx pilot has an 80% kinetic resist on his shield. This would cause 1,744,860 damage to the Nyx's shield and would destroy the Thanatos. Furthermore, in order to stop gratuitous suicide capitals, the impact would also kill the capsuleer, resulting in no chance of escape.
This is just a theory that went through my head earlier. I'd like suggestions on either how to improve/balance it further, or rational explanations as to why it's complete bollocks.
(P.S. It's capitals only, but not for supercaps. 'Cause that'd make them even more retardedly OP.)
It's been discussed.
If we distribute pictures of people, does that mean God can file copyright claims under SOPA? |
Quade Warren
Urban Mining Corp Rising Phoenix Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 20:41:00 -
[28] - Quote
You're looking at some pretty intense collision detection that would have to be implemented server side.
I'm no veteran programmer, but let us break it down. Currently, Eve appears to utilize a collision cheat, which is an invisible bubble surrounding all ships. Collision detection on a bubble is MUCH easier than on, let's say, a Hyperion. For each face on a complex polygon you would have to determine whether or not there is a collision. If you take a look at all the spikes, gizmos and other odd shapes that compose or Eve reality, then collision detection becomes a computational nightmare.
This is not lessened any more by determining interceptions. Since Jita is our test bed, look at all the ships undocking or around Jita 4-4. Now I fire a single shot through all of them. They are all traveling at different speeds or angles, velocities if you will. You have to calculate whether or not there is an interception for each ship in the ships path.
Ramming could be simply implemented by having a damage modifier on the current bubbles, but this would cascade into a demand for more accurate collisions to determine more accurate damage. It would ultimately result in the programmers having to do all of the above.
I'm all for this, but we do not have the processing power just yet. |
Andy Landen
The Illuminatii Mildly Intoxicated
19
|
Posted - 2012.04.05 22:35:00 -
[29] - Quote
To ElQ, just because you discussed a variant of the idea using a new Kamikazi skill and lots of both crazy and similar ideas doesn't mean that this discussion was effectively covered by your work.
Quade Warren wrote:You're looking at some pretty intense collision detection that would have to be implemented server side.
I'm no veteran programmer, but let us break it down. Currently, Eve appears to utilize a collision cheat, which is an invisible bubble surrounding all ships. Collision detection on a bubble is MUCH easier than on, let's say, a Hyperion. For each face on a complex polygon you would have to determine whether or not there is a collision. If you take a look at all the spikes, gizmos and other odd shapes that compose or Eve reality, then collision detection becomes a computational nightmare.
This is not lessened any more by determining interceptions. Since Jita is our test bed, look at all the ships undocking or around Jita 4-4. Now I fire a single shot through all of them. They are all traveling at different speeds or angles, velocities if you will. You have to calculate whether or not there is an interception for each ship in the ships path.
Ramming could be simply implemented by having a damage modifier on the current bubbles, but this would cascade into a demand for more accurate collisions to determine more accurate damage. It would ultimately result in the programmers having to do all of the above.
I'm all for this, but we do not have the processing power just yet.
Quade, I think it is a given that collisions will only look at radial velocities and masses of both objects with the distance shown on the overview is 0 m. However CCP does it, they already have a way of determining both distance and radial velocities. I am not asking for any new polygon approaches or other new computations. Secondly, I am not asking for any changes in current firing mechanics for weapons and ammo. No demands for more accurate collisions and damages. No computational nightmares. Sufficient data already exists to determine damages. The largest issues as I see it are avoiding collisions while warping to a point. I think CCP needs to step up their game on this anyway by calculating a safe place to drop out of warp to avoid collisions when the player has anti-collision enable. The warp engines just drop the ship out of warp a little sooner or later to avoid collisions. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |