These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Fleet formations / weapons fire line of sight

Author
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#21 - 2014-03-04 18:19:15 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:

Also, LoS will mess people up in hi sec. The new grief tactic would be flying in front of someone's turret when its firing to trigger concord. And if it doesn't trigger concord, then you have a new method of killing things in hi sec without concord by shooting at a corp mate that places your target between you and them.


Why is it every time this is brought up people immediately bring up scenarios that anyone with an IQ over 10 would account for before putting in this system?

I could make sure that what you suggested doesn't happen with 5 lines of code.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#22 - 2014-03-04 18:46:24 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:

Also, LoS will mess people up in hi sec. The new grief tactic would be flying in front of someone's turret when its firing to trigger concord. And if it doesn't trigger concord, then you have a new method of killing things in hi sec without concord by shooting at a corp mate that places your target between you and them.


Why is it every time this is brought up people immediately bring up scenarios that anyone with an IQ over 10 would account for before putting in this system?

I could make sure that what you suggested doesn't happen with 5 lines of code.

So why didn't you? If you have a great idea, that isn't just crappy patch to clumsily fix the issue please share it and bask in the awe of your peers.

Regardless it's asked because the people proposing the initial idea don't take the time to even consider most of the unintended consequences and it's a good way in general of showing how fundamental change it would be to the game. Besides the direct problems caused, such consequences also increase the overall cost of the proposal and therefore make it harder for the proponents of the initial idea to show the good brought by their change could ever warrant the associated development and gameplay costs.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2014-03-04 18:53:34 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:

Regardless it's asked because the people proposing the initial idea don't take the time to even consider most of the unintended consequences


Why don't you consider the current consequences that make fleet combat so horrible, people would rather drop their drones and go AFK until it ends.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Batelle
Filthy Peasants
#24 - 2014-03-04 19:07:53 UTC
Reiisha wrote:
Batelle wrote:
The mechanic would introduce an uncountable mess of problems without giving players the tools to address them. It would be bad and frustrating gameplay.

The idea is admirable because **immersion**, but I just dont think it fits in this game.


How would it not fit in the game? So far i've only heard one non-technical argument against it and that is a highly speculative worst-case scenario - Which interestingly enough results in exactly the same situation we have already. Why would it be frustrating? Right now most fleets just end up in following primaries and pressing F1....


Cuz flying ships in Eve is clunky as hell compared to any other space-game with fine-control over aiming. Basically you want blobs to have less damage because of friendly fire, which might be great if you hate blobs, but its one of those things we can safely call "unfun." I would file this suggestion as "cool but unworkable" along with bumping causing damage.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.

Sigras
Conglomo
#25 - 2014-03-04 20:05:52 UTC
Except for MasterNerdGuy, you are all seriously underestimating the number of calculations needed to make this happen.

Considering that you would have to determine the model and orientation of each ship, and determine how much of the ship needs to be eclipsed in order to be considered "blocked" this calculation would be extremely complex, but lets set that aside. We can assume each ship is just going to take up a sphere the size of its signature radius.

Each time you fire a shot, the server has to check the relative radius of each ship on grid against the relative radius of your target as it appears to you because an atron right in front of you is going to be more in the way than a megathron at 50km. Lets say for the sake of the argument that you can do this for each ship in 6 calculations. Thats 6 calculations per object on grid per ship thats firing!

You think there's lag in eve now? try fighting in an asteroid field with LOS on. In fact, I bet with LOS on you couldnt get 100 people on each side shooting at each other before the server crashes.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2014-03-04 21:02:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Sentamon
Sigras wrote:

You think there's lag in eve now? try fighting in an asteroid field with LOS on. In fact, I bet with LOS on you couldnt get 100 people on each side shooting at each other before the server crashes.


Only if they're fools and try to make a perfect simulation that takes every single object on field into account, fortunately any game designer worth his pay would not.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Sigras
Conglomo
#27 - 2014-03-04 21:11:13 UTC
even 200 ships on grid and nothing else would cause massive amounts of lag.
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#28 - 2014-03-04 21:23:39 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Sigras wrote:

You think there's lag in eve now? try fighting in an asteroid field with LOS on. In fact, I bet with LOS on you couldnt get 100 people on each side shooting at each other before the server crashes.


Only if they're fools and try to make a perfect simulation that takes every single object on field into account, fortunately any game designer worth his pay would not.


You are ignoring the fact that even the most simplistic complete solution to this problem is too inefficient. Anything less than a complete solution isn't going to work because it won't always model the behavior properly.

If you don't take all objects on the grid into account, you are going to have lots of situations where a ray goes somewhere it shouldn't have gone, or doesn't go somewhere it should have. You can't just arbitrarily ignore objects in the scene when you are performing this kind of calculation.

Things are only impossible until they are not.

Reiisha
#29 - 2014-03-04 22:23:46 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
Sigras wrote:

You think there's lag in eve now? try fighting in an asteroid field with LOS on. In fact, I bet with LOS on you couldnt get 100 people on each side shooting at each other before the server crashes.


Only if they're fools and try to make a perfect simulation that takes every single object on field into account, fortunately any game designer worth his pay would not.


You are ignoring the fact that even the most simplistic complete solution to this problem is too inefficient. Anything less than a complete solution isn't going to work because it won't always model the behavior properly.

If you don't take all objects on the grid into account, you are going to have lots of situations where a ray goes somewhere it shouldn't have gone, or doesn't go somewhere it should have. You can't just arbitrarily ignore objects in the scene when you are performing this kind of calculation.


After reading up a bit, i do have to admit, it's not as simple as i thought it would be. Too bad... I still think the mechanic itself would be a pretty good idea. Though, i still think there should be a much more efficient solution somewhere... AFAIK Sins of a Solar Empire has something similar going on between a comparable number of ships? Oh well.

That said, i do still think this would be a good idea for doomsday devices.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
#30 - 2014-03-04 22:42:54 UTC
Does no one else remember when missiles used to have collision detection? It was nearly impossible to Rat in a big roid field because half your missiles would hit a roid instead of your target, or hit your loot containers. And it was also too easy to get concorded in highsec by mistake. It was removed for these reasons.

That awkward moment at the Gentlemen's Club when you see your sister on the stage....and you're not sure where to put the money....

Markku Laaksonen
EVE University
Ivy League
#31 - 2014-03-05 01:56:16 UTC
LoS has interested me since the first day I started playing.

DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/

EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy

Reiisha
#32 - 2014-03-05 09:19:56 UTC
Couldn't fleet formations be used as a shortcut for LoS?

As in, you can fly in certain formations which adds protection when flown near or around other stuff, or protecting designated ships in the formation. It wouldn't actually be LoS but the effects could be similar.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#33 - 2014-03-05 10:07:15 UTC
Reiisha wrote:
The problem, of course, would be server load, though i believe it should be possible to do this with a simple vector calculation. As the current physics engine uses very simplistic objects anyway this should be all you need to do.

Performing the calculation is not the problem. The problem is when the server has to ask every single object on grid whether its position in space fits this straight line equation every time anyone fires their guns. I don't even want to think about how this would be implemented for missiles.

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#34 - 2014-03-05 10:16:52 UTC
Would this not make it borderline impossible to actually shoot a structure?
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#35 - 2014-03-05 11:01:36 UTC  |  Edited by: masternerdguy
Reiisha wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
Sigras wrote:

You think there's lag in eve now? try fighting in an asteroid field with LOS on. In fact, I bet with LOS on you couldnt get 100 people on each side shooting at each other before the server crashes.


Only if they're fools and try to make a perfect simulation that takes every single object on field into account, fortunately any game designer worth his pay would not.


You are ignoring the fact that even the most simplistic complete solution to this problem is too inefficient. Anything less than a complete solution isn't going to work because it won't always model the behavior properly.

If you don't take all objects on the grid into account, you are going to have lots of situations where a ray goes somewhere it shouldn't have gone, or doesn't go somewhere it should have. You can't just arbitrarily ignore objects in the scene when you are performing this kind of calculation.


After reading up a bit, i do have to admit, it's not as simple as i thought it would be. Too bad... I still think the mechanic itself would be a pretty good idea. Though, i still think there should be a much more efficient solution somewhere... AFAIK Sins of a Solar Empire has something similar going on between a comparable number of ships? Oh well.

That said, i do still think this would be a good idea for doomsday devices.


I am pretty sure Sins never performed LoS calculations. Based on my experience with it, I think it applies the damage to the other ship then draws a projectile that travels from ship A to ship B. I've seen damage applied even when the projectile clearly missed its target, and I've seen missiles pass through capital ships to hit a frigate on the other side.

Actually, that's how EVE does it too isn't it. It applies damage then draws some effect to make it look like something was fired.

If you want an example of an RTS that does a full simulation including LoS calculations, Supreme Commander (the first one) does this. That was one of the big selling points back in 2007 because it meant that formations, maneuvers, and terrain played a role in the outcome of fights.

EDIT: You may also remember how slow Supreme Commander gets, even for an RTS.

Things are only impossible until they are not.

Reiisha
#36 - 2014-03-05 11:24:48 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Reiisha wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
Sigras wrote:

You think there's lag in eve now? try fighting in an asteroid field with LOS on. In fact, I bet with LOS on you couldnt get 100 people on each side shooting at each other before the server crashes.


Only if they're fools and try to make a perfect simulation that takes every single object on field into account, fortunately any game designer worth his pay would not.


You are ignoring the fact that even the most simplistic complete solution to this problem is too inefficient. Anything less than a complete solution isn't going to work because it won't always model the behavior properly.

If you don't take all objects on the grid into account, you are going to have lots of situations where a ray goes somewhere it shouldn't have gone, or doesn't go somewhere it should have. You can't just arbitrarily ignore objects in the scene when you are performing this kind of calculation.


After reading up a bit, i do have to admit, it's not as simple as i thought it would be. Too bad... I still think the mechanic itself would be a pretty good idea. Though, i still think there should be a much more efficient solution somewhere... AFAIK Sins of a Solar Empire has something similar going on between a comparable number of ships? Oh well.

That said, i do still think this would be a good idea for doomsday devices.


I am pretty sure Sins never performed LoS calculations. Based on my experience with it, I think it applies the damage to the other ship then draws a projectile that travels from ship A to ship B. I've seen damage applied even when the projectile clearly missed its target, and I've seen missiles pass through capital ships to hit a frigate on the other side.

Actually, that's how EVE does it too isn't it. It applies damage then draws some effect to make it look like something was fired.

If you want an example of an RTS that does a full simulation including LoS calculations, Supreme Commander (the first one) does this. That was one of the big selling points back in 2007 because it meant that formations, maneuvers, and terrain played a role in the outcome of fights.

EDIT: You may also remember how slow Supreme Commander gets, even for an RTS.


I wonder if making this possible is a question of pure compute power, or whether there is still a solution to make the calculations more efficient than the exponential increase mentioned before...

In that first case, achieving the same rough effect by fleet formations (an actual new feature rather than a 'tactic') might be an idea, to simulate LoS in a very dirty way rather than actually doing the calculations for it.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

masternerdguy
Doomheim
#37 - 2014-03-05 11:50:55 UTC  |  Edited by: masternerdguy
Reiisha wrote:


I wonder if making this possible is a question of pure compute power, or whether there is still a solution to make the calculations more efficient than the exponential increase mentioned before...

In that first case, achieving the same rough effect by fleet formations (an actual new feature rather than a 'tactic') might be an idea, to simulate LoS in a very dirty way rather than actually doing the calculations for it.


The problems with fleet formations have been discussed in other threads. It's not a good idea and is open to significant abuse. Having arbitrary fleet formations that provide static buffs and debuffs is bad gameplay, and only doing LoS calculations on ships in formation is going to be exploited. Not to mention that the biggest gains of doing those calculations, the ability to hide behind asteroids or structures, are lost. So what would the point be?

Also, this isn't an exponential increase, it's a polynomial time problem. If it were exponential, it would be something more like 2^N which grows far faster than N^2. In fact, exponential (non polynomial time) algorithms are so hilariously inefficient that we have a special name for them: intractable.

It's intractable because the growth rate is so rapid that even adding more hardware isn't going to help you. Exponential algorithms are not good solutions because they slow down so quickly as the number of objects it needs to be performed on increases.

Fortunately, our problem is a nice polynomial time algorithm so we don't have to worry about that, but even adding new hardware isn't a great solution. Yes, adding new hardware will make it possible, but it could be better spent on just allowing more people to participate in the fight, or by staving off TiDi so fights are more fun. So if we had some epic supercomputer from the future that gave the game server a massive boost in computing power, yes it would be possible. But that added raw computing power could be better used elsewhere.

I don't think you are going to make this problem much more efficient. Most of the papers on this stuff were written decades ago and few advancements have been made (this is the case in disciplines where math dictates what is possible). If you do figure it out, please publish immediately. The problem is that all the more efficient shortcuts make assumptions we can't make in EVE PVP such as a static scene or some entities never being able to interact with each other.

The thing is, EVE makes lots of compromises to be as big as it is. There's always someone suggesting being able to fly your ship with a joystick, or having more realistic collision detection, or line of sight calculations for weapons. The problem is that these ideas drastically increase the complexity of the physics simulation and that just can't scale to the number of players involved here. We'd have to do what FPS servers do and limit you to 32 or 64 players in a match, which is not something I am willing to accept no matter what because having thousands of players involved is one of the things that makes EVE unique.

Things are only impossible until they are not.

Reiisha
#38 - 2014-03-05 12:20:15 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Reiisha wrote:


I wonder if making this possible is a question of pure compute power, or whether there is still a solution to make the calculations more efficient than the exponential increase mentioned before...

In that first case, achieving the same rough effect by fleet formations (an actual new feature rather than a 'tactic') might be an idea, to simulate LoS in a very dirty way rather than actually doing the calculations for it.


The problems with fleet formations have been discussed in other threads. It's not a good idea and is open to significant abuse. Having arbitrary fleet formations that provide static buffs and debuffs is bad gameplay, and only doing LoS calculations on ships in formation is going to be exploited. Not to mention that the biggest gains of doing those calculations, the ability to hide behind asteroids or structures, are lost. So what would the point be?

Also, this isn't an exponential increase, it's a polynomial time problem. If it were exponential, it would be something more like 2^N which grows far faster than N^2. In fact, exponential (non polynomial time) algorithms are so hilariously inefficient that we have a special name for them: intractable.

It's intractable because the growth rate is so rapid that even adding more hardware isn't going to help you. Exponential algorithms are not good solutions because they slow down so quickly as the number of objects it needs to be performed on increases.

Fortunately, our problem is a nice polynomial time algorithm so we don't have to worry about that, but even adding new hardware isn't a great solution. Yes, adding new hardware will make it possible, but it could be better spent on just allowing more people to participate in the fight, or by staving off TiDi so fights are more fun. So if we had some epic supercomputer from the future that gave the game server a massive boost in computing power, yes it would be possible. But that added raw computing power could be better used elsewhere.

I don't think you are going to make this problem much more efficient. Most of the papers on this stuff were written decades ago and few advancements have been made (this is the case in disciplines where math dictates what is possible). If you do figure it out, please publish immediately. The problem is that all the more efficient shortcuts make assumptions we can't make in EVE PVP such as a static scene or some entities never being able to interact with each other.

The thing is, EVE makes lots of compromises to be as big as it is. There's always someone suggesting being able to fly your ship with a joystick, or having more realistic collision detection, or line of sight calculations for weapons. The problem is that these ideas drastically increase the complexity of the physics simulation and that just can't scale to the number of players involved here. We'd have to do what FPS servers do and limit you to 32 or 64 players in a match, which is not something I am willing to accept no matter what because having thousands of players involved is one of the things that makes EVE unique.


Thanks for clearing that up. I'll have to look for those other threads later - While i can think of a few abuse problems i don't think its something that cant be solved, though i probably haven't thought of all possible consequences yet.

This is really too bad... I just have this strong notion that LoS would solve a lot of problems which wouldn't need very abstract solutions otherwise. Blobs are one part of this. I thought of having proper collision detection between ships but i guess that's infinitely more abusable...

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

masternerdguy
Doomheim
#39 - 2014-03-05 12:48:58 UTC
Yeah this thread has kind of turned into a computer science lecture.

Things are only impossible until they are not.

Reiisha
#40 - 2014-03-05 12:55:03 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Yeah this thread has kind of turned into a computer science lecture.


Hey, at least one person (ahem) learned something so it's not a total loss :)

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Previous page123Next page