EVE Information Portal

Your beautiful new V3 stations please ....

Yes, there was some thinking behind some of those choices Ah but seriously there was.

I don't quite follow you on the Providence, it is true that she has a gap across her main armor plating just about in the middle, but this place also represents just about the absolute thickest part of the ship.

Also to that I would say, what you describe is almost like someone holding a stick at either end, applying force until it breaks at its weakest point.
That's not how i interpret the ship damages. The damages and locations of these is based on imagined direct hits, armor/hull breaches, ammunition chamber explosions etc. (I am imagining some pretty hefty ammunition chambers here, after all, we are blowing apart Titans)

As far as the Naglfar, Ragnarok and other ships with lesser damage, yes it was a choice not to have them all break apart completely.
Obviously I have seen that people have commented on this, and that some Naglfar pilots/hunters are somewhat disappointed in the amount of damage it has received.

It was not intentional to have some wreck be underwhelming, but rather be a bit more clever and subtle in their destruction.
Like the Naglfar, where the top bridge and main gun mounts have been blown to bits, and the before moving parts of the siege module is floating around detached in space.
But we will absolutely keep this in mind when we hopefully get around to making more variations on the individual ship wrecks some day

You mention that better wrecks help with immersion. But the new ones have one big immersion breaker: Floating parts.
If a part is floating free of the ship then it must have moved there; that is at one time it had some net velocity. But now its just sitting there. What stopped it? Space has no friction.

Also in space very small forces, over time, can move things about great distances. Light pressure, solar wind, gravity gradients. Its totally unbelievable that parts of a wreck would remain flying in formation for any length of time. The pieces of the Jita monument should have dispersed long ago.

If the goal was just a pretty game this would not matter. You succeeded in doing that part. But you specifically stated that improving immersion was a goal. Immersion-wise the wrecks just look... strange. Better would be to have parts dangling at the end of cables or thin strips of metal and other wreckage elements.

Thanks. I love elaborate and well written summaries. This is a game for people who are obsessed with details.

Thanks for the long awaited Dev Blog. Still no mention of the Amarr colors issue so I hope that is not forgotten

I came here to write this, but I see it was already written :)

Honestly ship wrecks was a very big surprise for me when I saw them in trailer.
I had to change my pants after seeing it! They are amazing!!!
This is the single best part of Rubicon 1.1
Thank you! And I hope to see more wreck on 1.2 :)

Now I will be going to hunt some capital ships just to see it's inside

B.T.W. I support new salvaging proposal

Fantastic work TriLambda, it all looks amazing (although the Crucifier gives me a disturbing sense of being upside down).

I look forward to seeing some of these wrecks on TQ, although I'll have to venure further afield than I'd usually like for the chance. The devblog was interesting too, it's nice to get an understanding of the work that goes into things that are easy to take for granted.

A couple of questions occurred to me as I read the dev blog.

• Is the wrecking of the hull animated or does it just appear as a static object once the initial explosion subsides?


• You wrote that the damage displayed is procedurally generated - is it conceivable that this process be applied on an ad-hoc basis to generate unique wrecks or whould that be a resource/client killer?


• Are there any plans to apply the same process to sub-capitals? I note that the physical mesh floor experiment was conducted on a Raven hull.

\o/ We can turn dust clouds off!

This is the graphics advancement that EVE players have been waiting for, since 2003 ;)

When I was at Eve Vegas one of the Devs (I forget who) at a round table said there is an unwritten agreement between the players and the developers that the game should make sense. That is when I look at the game what I see at should be what I expect to see and when I do something what happens should be what I expect to have happen.

I do not expect to see a wreck with disconnected parts sitting there with all the parts utterly static. I agree the new wrecks are visually impressive but to me they just look wrong.

"The ‘effect’ setting will now toggle particle clouds on/off."
It may come as a surprise, but there is at least one who would like to turn off the clouds regardless of performance issues. The only thing is, you have lumped turning them off into the same circuit breaker that, according to the pop-up help text, controls a whole bunch of other, desireable effects.