Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Siward
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
The idea is to provide the ability to avoid being shot by taking refuge behind large collidable structures. This would mostly be aimmed at making npc missions more dynamic, especially for new players. Too often the strategy adopted by players running a difficult mission involves warping out to repair shields or kiting ships. This breaks up flow and makes the mission more of a task than fun. Multiple possible mechanics are discussed.
The linked presentation highlights to rest of the proposal.
Presentation |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
1180
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:49:00 -
[2] - Quote
LoS targeting/firing would require a fundamental change in the game's engine. Raytracing like that is a LOT of extra calculations for the servers to handle and I'm pretty sure that it's pretty much impossible (not to mention the fact that it would just be annoying most of the time, once the 10 min of "hey, line of sight" wore off). |
Siward
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:58:00 -
[3] - Quote
Collision is calculated with respect to every ship on grid as well as to the LCSs already. Adding this routine to targeted objects can not be very heavy esp if applied on the client side. How many LCS are there ever on grid? What I am asking is exactly the same mechanic used for targeting object inside a POS shield |
Misanthra
Alternative Enterprises
51
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
your harder rats have nice active tanks that recharge tank decently fast
if you hide in cover, you can't fire at them either. I am discounting drones boats here....if a player can't tank a domi or rattler they have issues.
so basically you want to regrind rat tanks that rep themselves while popping in and out of cover? Even better with BS, unless mach they don't duck and cover too fast. The sloooow 180 to head back ot cover is damn near perfect traversal...for the rats. Big money hits.
Your missioner is better off right clicking and orbit and spanking the prop mod here and there.
|
Danel Tosh
EVE Protection Agency Intrepid Crossing
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 22:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
they said orbitable bombardment in dust would be impossible too.
I think this would be a neat addition assuming it looks and functions cool. |
Siward
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 23:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
Misanthra wrote:your harder rats have nice active tanks that recharge tank decently fast
if you hide in cover, you can't fire at them either. I am discounting drones boats here....if a player can't tank a domi or rattler they have issues.
so basically you want to regrind rat tanks that rep themselves while popping in and out of cover? Even better with BS, unless mach they don't duck and cover too fast. The sloooow 180 to head back ot cover is damn near perfect traversal...for the rats. Big money hits.
Your missioner is better off right clicking and orbit and spanking the prop mod here and there.
I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say. |
Oberine Noriepa
654
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 23:22:00 -
[7] - Quote
I have nothing but support for this idea, as it's a very good one. It would require a lot of changes, but it would make combat a lot more interesting.
I like your presentation, too. |
Siward
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 00:03:00 -
[8] - Quote
Oberine Noriepa wrote:I have nothing but support for this idea, as it's a very good one. It would require a lot of changes, but it would make combat a lot more interesting. I like your presentation, too. Woohoo. Thanks for the encouraging words. It would take work. But sometimes ideas require :effort:. It wouldn't be a quick change, but at least something like this could be modular since from a coding perspective it would just return a true or false for target break.
|
Misanthra
Alternative Enterprises
51
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 00:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
Siward wrote:I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say.
if you are hiding your aren't killing things. if you aren't killing things they will rep themselves and you make killing them harder than it needs to be. Best way to run missions is kill off dps fast as possible.
Example....rush in in a bs bs like torp golem or mach and start mowing things down. The initial attack by say 5 BS' will hurt shields a bit. Kill one dps dealing rat bs, your tank is less abused. Kill 2, tanks should not be sweating much. Kill 3 and you should be repping more than the damage incoming. Last bs left should be almost no damage if you are running the proper resists. This method works even better orbiitting. More you move, less damage you take.
When you take a bs and tell it to make course adjustment quickly to get into cover. this turn will be slow. You will basically be almost as easy to hit as if standing still. Means you get hit full force damn near. Mach the exception of course...flies like a smaller ship. |
Siward
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 00:57:00 -
[10] - Quote
Misanthra wrote:Siward wrote:I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say. if you are hiding your aren't killing things. if you aren't killing things they will rep themselves and you make killing them harder than it needs to be. Best way to run missions ... << This
What does this have to do with the idea suggestion? I'm perfectly aware about how to run a mission quickly. But this post is about a change to targeting mechanics, not tanking |
|
Brom MkLeith
Epsilon Inc STORM.
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 21:07:00 -
[11] - Quote
I personaly like the idea of LCS's disrupting LOS attacks. It adds realism to the game. I would also like to see it applied to ships blocking LOS. You would see a lot of different real tactics being used and it would bring a new element to all combat. I.R.L. can you imagine a targeting laser being able to hit a fishing boat hiding behind an aircraft carrier? Wouldn't happen.
But then again, guided missiles would have too great an advantage over turret wpns. and the trickle down effect of the nerf bat would make it all a nightmare.
|
mxzf
Shovel Bros
1186
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 21:23:00 -
[12] - Quote
Siward wrote:Collision is calculated with respect to every ship on grid as well as to the LCSs already. Adding this routine to targeted objects can not be very heavy esp if applied on the client side. How many LCS are there ever on grid? What I am asking is exactly the same mechanic used for targeting object inside a POS shield
Um, bounding-box collision calculated per-object when you hit another object is relatively simple and easy. Calculating the raytrace of every single weapon fired in the game and the LoS between every single pair of entities constantly is a MUCH more difficult task. It's just not feasible.
And it can't be done client side, only the server has an accurate and constant track of every object, currently the extent of what the client does is tell the server "hey, I'm shooting at the guy you told me was within range" and then rendering an arbitrary shot based on the server replying "you hit him solidly", "you just winged him", or "not even close". The client isn't calculating if it hits the target or not, the server has to do that.
And it's a completely different mechanic from POS shields. The POS shield mechanic consists of checking if either party is within a specific area, defined as the POS shields, and sending back a "go" or "no go" based on the results. LoS calculations would involve constantly raytracing to check if there is a vector between two objects that doesn't intersect the bounding box of any other object; which is a MUCH more difficult and CPU-intensive process. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
219
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 21:24:00 -
[13] - Quote
Station and gate games are annoying enough as it is. If you allow people to also hide behind stations and gates, then it becomes even more so annoying.
There are some other things you're not factoring here.
1) will logistics go through/around? 2) will ewar go around? 3) remote sensor booster? 4) cap warfare?
However, the only major thing you're forgetting here is that Eve would need a massive overhaul on the radius' of all in game collidible objects.
An example would be that i can undock from a station and fly straight and when someone else undocks I'll be 40km from them, however, I'm only 1km from the station itself....
So every collidible object in game would need to have their signatures re-established so that we don't get stuck in situations where I'm looking straight at a guy who appears to be in wide open space where I should be able to shoot him, yet there's an invisible wall given off by the collidible object, so i'm unable to hit him.
But like I said, the main reason I wouldn't want this to be implemented is because it breaks the game. Do you want someone to be able to escape your warp scram just because they flew to the other side of the gate?
While possitive aspects of this are just as deep as the negative aspects, it's still one of those things that you'd love for a bit until it got you in a situation where it was negative for you.
Kinda like gate camps...Everyone hates them until they're the campers. |
killorbekilled TBE
Dare Bears
38
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 21:27:00 -
[14] - Quote
mxzf wrote:Siward wrote:Collision is calculated with respect to every ship on grid as well as to the LCSs already. Adding this routine to targeted objects can not be very heavy esp if applied on the client side. How many LCS are there ever on grid? What I am asking is exactly the same mechanic used for targeting object inside a POS shield Um, bounding-box collision calculated per-object when you hit another object is relatively simple and easy. Calculating the raytrace of every single weapon fired in the game and the LoS between every single pair of entities constantly is a MUCH more difficult task. It's just not feasible. And it can't be done client side, only the server has an accurate and constant track of every object, currently the extent of what the client does is tell the server "hey, I'm shooting at the guy you told me was within range" and then rendering an arbitrary shot based on the server replying "you hit him solidly", "you just winged him", or "not even close". The client isn't calculating if it hits the target or not, the server has to do that. And it's a completely different mechanic from POS shields. The POS shield mechanic consists of checking if either party is within a specific area, defined as the POS shields, and sending back a "go" or "no go" based on the results. LoS calculations would involve constantly raytracing to check if there is a vector between two objects that doesn't intersect the bounding box of any other object; which is a MUCH more difficult and CPU-intensive process.
and the reason ccp hasn't hired you is because.......? huh? |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3730
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 01:37:00 -
[15] - Quote
because for the amount of effort this would require the amount of return is... not worth the manpower.
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
98
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 02:09:00 -
[16] - Quote
This is a great idea, but would make every fleet fight with >20 people on each side push TiDi to its max;
designing a game taught me just how hard it is to do LOS detection because every time a gun is fired, you have to check the ray between the firing ship and the ship taking damage against everything else on grid. Also, you'd have to use hit boxes which arent the end of the world but thats another thing that you'd have to balance would be the model of the ship
This would also exacerbate lag as your ship may not appear to be where the server thinks it actually is.
Lastly, it raises several questions that need to be answered like . . . what about cloaked ships? clearly they're transparent so lasers should go right through them, but what about projectiles? would they get de-cloaked? would they take damage? What about missiles? would they ignore this LOS issue because they can go around the thing in the way? would that add to their flight path and therfore decrease their effective distance? would you add path-finding to the missile?
Its a great idea, and one that ive thought would be cool for a long time, but it may be able to be implemented in 2070 when we all have photonic transistor CPUs and <10ms ping, until then stick with what is possible |
Siward
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 18:23:00 -
[17] - Quote
Perpetum. It's a knock off of Eve with robots on the ground. It does exactly what I've suggested except not only does it do it with every object, but also with all terrain, with pvp big fights etc. It can be done. So how about all of you stop thinking for CCP and let them decide if it can be done. If you like the idea, say so. Maybe they make it happen.
The idea of ship LOS would just be annoying.
Is vote that all modules (ecm logi sensor etc) would be affected, bit that's a rather fine detail right now. |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
1196
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 18:34:00 -
[18] - Quote
Siward wrote:Perpetum. It's a knock off of Eve with robots on the ground. It does exactly what I've suggested except not only does it do it with every object, but also with all terrain, with pvp big fights etc. It can be done. So how about all of you stop thinking for CCP and let them decide if it can be done. If you like the idea, say so. Maybe they make it happen.
You're an idiot. The engine of Perpetum is COMPLETELY different from Eve, meaning that there is no correlation between what the two games are capable of handling with regards to LoS. Saying "Well, COD handles LoS, so Eve should be able to" is just as valid a comparison as Perpetum (as in, not valid at all). |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |