These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Asking for directions

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#101 - 2011-11-17 18:38:50 UTC
Oberine Noriepa wrote:
Just an FYI, some Gallente stargates aren't properly aligned to their destination star. I submitted a bug report for this. (ID#: 118728)

Here's a screenshot of the misalignment: Clicky


I noticed that too. But I also noticed that sighting down the bore of the gate did show it pointed at the correct star. Then the gate fired and I noticed that the gate effect is not lined up with the gate!

It may be a side effect of the limitations of the graphics. There may be poor granularity in the direction the gate effect can be shown in, and the game just picks the closest option.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2011-11-17 18:50:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Maxsim Goratiev
Aweome. Trouble is that as soon as you show us a path of improvement we always want moar. But thanks a lot for rotating the gates, now it won't feel so flat any more.

StukaBee wrote:
booya


You know what would be really awesome though? If you could see the 'spiderwebs' of your constellation's stargates (or even the whole region?) projected between the stars like they appear in the map view, rather than just the stars themselves. Also, imagine if those nearby stars in space showed on the HUD, and you could set destination/jump to beacon/etc just by right clicking on them in space (rather than having to F10 or F11 and use the separate map).

I second this request to have some closest stars actually physically visible and clicable
Quote:
Also, is there any relationship between the stargate location in a system and where it's going to? In a few systems I noticed stargates sending you down in the starmap are actually located high in the system map.

I doubt it. the thing is it's not really nessesary to have a gate on the right end of the solar system, the gate sends you several lightyears away, compared to that kind of distance even a 200 AU system is literally nothing. SO it's all fine as long as it does not go through the star or smth.
Quote:

I noticed that too. But I also noticed that sighting down the bore of the gate did show it pointed at the correct star. Then the gate fired and I noticed that the gate effect is not lined up with the gate!

It may be a side effect of the limitations of the graphics. There may be poor granularity in the direction the gate effect can be shown in, and the game just picks the closest option.

Whoever used that gate, will now end up in a different galaxy far-far away. Lol
GRIEV3R
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#103 - 2011-11-17 19:48:22 UTC
This change is totally worth re-doing all my bookmarks. Big smile
Typhu5
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#104 - 2011-11-17 20:12:06 UTC
Chicken Pizza wrote:
5. What if a player is afk at a POS? Does he move with the POS? And what if he's orbiting the POS? I hope you're going to be writing the code for this so CCP doesn't have to.


That should not be the problem.
The speed of your ship is related to your POS, if you have the same speed as your POS, your
speed is 0 and you are, obviously, not moving.
If you drop out off ftl, it doesn't mean you don't have any speed at all when standing still.
You have only a related speed to the moon, planet, sun and to the center of the eve universe....,
if it exist...
If this is to confusing, let's say, the POS emits a gravity field that holds your ship and everything
else what is inside the force field at place. Or the force field holds everything at place and
modules outside the force field have thruster's who holds them in place.

Now to the bookmarks.
We could say that, for corp. members, a POS is visible in the overview.
Everyone else need someone, they can warp to.
When they are at the POS they can use the POS beacon (remember, POS is in the overview for corp. members,
that mean, it has a beacon.) to make a bookmark.
And to make the bookmark, you need to see the POS.

Done.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#105 - 2011-11-17 22:34:43 UTC
GRIEV3R wrote:
This change is totally worth re-doing all my bookmarks. Big smile


Yes, it would be, but you should have no need to. Only the graphical orientation of the gate is changing, not it's position in space.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Coarl
Serenity Logistics Corporation
#106 - 2011-11-18 00:34:15 UTC
So much of a sense of the awesome coming back to the game... Eve is becoming that which we all fell in love with all over again... it's almost like a new game Lol

...almost BlinkBear
Tear Miner
Doomheim
#107 - 2011-11-18 00:50:11 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
CCP Mannapi wrote:
So as some have seen on SISI we also have stars in the proper locations. The stargates will point you to the actual solarsystem and you will be able to tell how far the jump is from the perspective scaling of the stars. Closer stars are bigger.



Hate to throw realism into this, but at a distance of multiple light years the size of the star is irrelevant. You can have super-massive stars much further away than say a nearby white dwarf and they'll still both be pinpricks in the sky.

In this case, size doesn't matter.


1. Make erroneous claim in thread.
2. Never return to thread to correct erroneous claim.
3. Continue on in life with erroneous ideas in head.
4. ?????????????
5. PROFIT!!!!!
Hawkwar
M.I.M.M.S
#108 - 2011-11-18 01:19:17 UTC
Nice work now we just need ships to sit pointing in the same direction they last traveled rather than "leveling out" like they currently do.
Lolmer
Merciless Reckoning
#109 - 2011-11-18 02:09:12 UTC
Chicken Pizza wrote:

That would involve a great deal of re-coding. I take it you aren't familiar with programming. It may seem easy to you, but that's only because you aren't going to be the one wading through piles upon piles of lines.

Yes, this would be potentially game breaking. It changes the tactics of PvP and certain PvE aspects quite drastically. If all celestial objects in a solar system are constantly changing position, there are many, MANY game mechanics that will have to be redesigned in the ensuing chain reaction.

1. Warp disruption bubbles will no longer be viable on warp vectors because the vectors will be constantly changing. That will have to be rectified. Bubbles are a crucial part of nullsec PvP in many circumstances.

2. The distance to an anomaly upon entering through a stargate will never be predictable ever again. Some planets have a 30-40AU radius in their orbit around the sun. Some are even larger than that.

3. The element of surprise when a stealth bomber enters a system and tries to dscan an area normally close to the stargate loses said element because the anomaly is now 25AU away, and he couldn't find out until he jumped into the system.

4. CCP would have to figure out orbit paths for literally hundreds of thousands of celestial objects that take different amounts of time to revolve because it wouldn't "make sense" to people like you if they all had the same exact orbit duration.

5. What if a player is afk at a POS? Does he move with the POS? And what if he's orbiting the POS? I hope you're going to be writing the code for this so CCP doesn't have to.

6. Warping to different areas around a celestial would completely eliminate any risk factor whatsoever in bouncing planets for the already agile ships like Cynabals. There are other effects, but that was the most prominent one in my mind.

Fact is, CCP is already making a lot of coding changes, gameplay changes, aesthetic changes, etc. Why load their plate with more crap that just makes PvP harder for those of us who actually run ops and PvP? You should PvP more. It teaches you how the game should and should not be changed.


TLDR; All of your arguments are straw men. Please come back with valid issues that cannot be easily resolved or are not an issue (and in fact are even better for gameplay (e.g. #2 and #3)).

Only drastic changes if you don't think of reasonable solutions. Sure, you can make any change "game breaking" if you refuse to try and think around the box, or perhaps modify the idea to not be so drastic (e.g. see below). Sure, re-coding sucks, but they're doing some of this anyways and, if they have time, some of this would be pretty neat and add new dynamics.

#1: Depends on the rotation speed. If an object takes months to rotate around the sun then this has minimal impact to your bubbles, just "update" them every now and then. How fast do you think these celestial bodies and stargates will move through space? It's all configurable by CCP so as to not cause to cause this issue.

#2,3: Why should it be predictable? Predictable events are boring, especially when they should be moving around.

#4: So? Again not difficult (as someone who has written an admittedly rudimentary solarium in OpenGL with varying orbits for planets and moons).

#5: See #1, but can also ASSuME that if he is inside the POS shield his ship is keeping a relative speed with the POS. Outside the shield...well, that depends. Maybe set relative speed based on the closest celestial?

#6: And this is an issue...why? I believe the "random warp-to" spot would be relative to your starting location. So a fleet in the same spot warping to 30 km to the same celestial would land together, but someone on the other side of the solar system warping to that same celestial at 30 km would not land with that fleet, but on the other side of the planet + 30km.

So...because CCP is already working on projects we can't think of more cool ideas for future projects, even if some of them are trivial (not saying the above changes are trivial)? Perhaps you should PvP more yourself rather than getting all teary eyed that your target now has more options and variability. Things change, adapt or die. Oh, and HTFU. :)
Verbz
Van Diemen's Demise
Northern Coalition.
#110 - 2011-11-18 06:50:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Verbz
You know those times when you find some really good pr0 n and you cant stop looking at it , and you decide to yourself that this is actually really good pr0 n ...

Yea same thing only with online spaceships...

NICE WORK :D
Adam Klamert
Khanid Civil Labour Union
#111 - 2011-11-18 08:17:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Adam Klamert
Gate alignment may be an issue but as for me i dont think it makes much of a difference they have the settings implemtents to say go from point A to Point B and that is wired in the gate......i
Ariane VoxDei
#112 - 2011-11-18 09:43:55 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
GRIEV3R wrote:
This change is totally worth re-doing all my bookmarks. Big smile


Yes, it would be, but you should have no need to. Only the graphical orientation of the gate is changing, not it's position in space.
Gates are not spherical, need i say more? Should be pretty obvious from the screenshot of the minmatar gate.
Of course, you would need to know why someone would prefer to use bookmarks, rather than the WTZ button, to realize why it becomes relevant.
But tricks of the trade... dont ask, dont tell.
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#113 - 2011-11-18 10:04:06 UTC
Yea... Bear

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
SwissChris1
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#114 - 2011-11-18 10:16:32 UTC
Quote:
If this happens to you we apologize for the inconvenience, and you may need to move the bookmark....


lol
Elistea
BLUE Regiment.
#115 - 2011-11-18 10:24:42 UTC
Great idea and +1 for fast response
Chicken Pizza
One-man Armada
#116 - 2011-11-18 18:01:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Chicken Pizza
Lolmer wrote:
Chicken Pizza wrote:
stuff i said


TLDR; All of your arguments are straw men. Please come back with valid issues that cannot be easily resolved or are not an issue (and in fact are even better for gameplay (e.g. #2 and #3)).

Only drastic changes if you don't think of reasonable solutions. Sure, you can make any change "game breaking" if you refuse to try and think around the box, or perhaps modify the idea to not be so drastic (e.g. see below). Sure, re-coding sucks, but they're doing some of this anyways and, if they have time, some of this would be pretty neat and add new dynamics.

#1: Depends on the rotation speed. If an object takes months to rotate around the sun then this has minimal impact to your bubbles, just "update" them every now and then. How fast do you think these celestial bodies and stargates will move through space? It's all configurable by CCP so as to not cause to cause this issue.

#2,3: Why should it be predictable? Predictable events are boring, especially when they should be moving around.

#4: So? Again not difficult (as someone who has written an admittedly rudimentary solarium in OpenGL with varying orbits for planets and moons).

#5: See #1, but can also ASSuME that if he is inside the POS shield his ship is keeping a relative speed with the POS. Outside the shield...well, that depends. Maybe set relative speed based on the closest celestial?

#6: And this is an issue...why? I believe the "random warp-to" spot would be relative to your starting location. So a fleet in the same spot warping to 30 km to the same celestial would land together, but someone on the other side of the solar system warping to that same celestial at 30 km would not land with that fleet, but on the other side of the planet + 30km.

So...because CCP is already working on projects we can't think of more cool ideas for future projects, even if some of them are trivial (not saying the above changes are trivial)? Perhaps you should PvP more yourself rather than getting all teary eyed that your target now has more options and variability. Things change, adapt or die. Oh, and HTFU. :)


1. Creates too much tedious work for players, even if it would only be updated, say, once a month. Many deep safe spots would either have to be changed or cause people grief when they realize the planets magically switched positions yesterday(how does THAT make sense) but far too late because they've already been dscanned and probed. Why do you think bubbles are anchorable? So we can move them all over the place constantly?

2/3. It SHOULD be predictable or else it effectively removes a gameplay element that makes carebearing in nullsec actually dangerous. And NAP fests with no danger are more boring and detrimental to the game than you think stationary planets are.

4. So you think coding a solarium(with no other purpose than to display planets, obviously) is suddenly grounds for asserting that modifying features in EvE is easy? Hahaha, you must be a college student. Lol

5. Actually, the only people who can legitimately answer that question work at CCP. Since you're giving merely more speculation in response to my question, does that mean you can't handle this so-called "straw man" argument? Straw man, my ass.

6. Planets are shown on your overview/dropdown for a reason. It's not so you can just warp to a random spot around it. You need to take a good long look at why certain things in EvE are the way they are before you make bad suggestions. More like adapt and consequently never die because carebear Joe thought it was a great idea to add more survivability for idiots just because he wants planets to move. It's a game, not a space documentary. Get it right.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#117 - 2011-11-18 18:36:03 UTC
Chicken Pizza wrote:
1. Creates too much tedious work for players, even if it would only be updated, say, once a month. Many deep safe spots would either have to be changed or cause people grief when they realize the planets magically switched positions yesterday(how does THAT make sense) but far too late because they've already been dscanned and probed. Why do you think bubbles are anchorable? So we can move them all over the place constantly?

You think planetary orbits are "magical". Maybe you should go play a fantasy MMO instead of a sci-fi one?

Planets orbit very slowly. Very, very, slowly. Jupiter is 5AU from the Sun (next door in EVE terms), and completes an orbit every 12 years. A planet that is, in EVE, outside scan range from the sun (14 AU) would have a period of 50 years. So all your arguments regarding deep safes and scan range are invalid unless you expect to play eve for a few decades without updating your bookmarks.

Where it gets interesting is in the inner planets and moons.

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
Trash Ice
Tesla Cat
#118 - 2011-11-18 21:40:43 UTC
To many stars
I cant see target markers now What?
Chicken Pizza
One-man Armada
#119 - 2011-11-19 05:28:05 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
Chicken Pizza wrote:
1. Creates too much tedious work for players, even if it would only be updated, say, once a month. Many deep safe spots would either have to be changed or cause people grief when they realize the planets magically switched positions yesterday(how does THAT make sense) but far too late because they've already been dscanned and probed. Why do you think bubbles are anchorable? So we can move them all over the place constantly?

You think planetary orbits are "magical". Maybe you should go play a fantasy MMO instead of a sci-fi one?

Planets orbit very slowly. Very, very, slowly. Jupiter is 5AU from the Sun (next door in EVE terms), and completes an orbit every 12 years. A planet that is, in EVE, outside scan range from the sun (14 AU) would have a period of 50 years. So all your arguments regarding deep safes and scan range are invalid unless you expect to play eve for a few decades without updating your bookmarks.

Where it gets interesting is in the inner planets and moons.


I guess you didn't read the part in the quote that I was responding to where he said that the planets could just be "updated", did you?
Acac Sunflyier
The Ascended Academy
#120 - 2011-11-21 08:41:51 UTC
CCP Guard wrote:
CCP Mannapi wants to tell you about some cool changes to stargate alignment and space-navigation which some of you have already noticed on Singularity, our main test server. Check out the blog right here, and let us know if you have feedback or questions for us.




Okay I've actually been wondering this for a while. If all the gates were lined up. Figured they weren't facing directly since none of them pointed down. But I gotta be honest, this is going to be really cool