These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Directly up and down in Eve

First post
Author
Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc.
LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
#1 - 2016-02-02 05:10:27 UTC
I know this has been an issue for players for years and not just myself as Ive had the conversation a few times with others over the years. How you cant really fix the camera to point directly up or down and therefore theres a small cone that you cant really point yourself well too. For me it mostly applied to undocking in amarr stations to make the best instaundocks but has been an issue in other times too.

Is this something CCP can fix? Is it an unintended result of something? What was the reason for it in the first place?


CCP response would be cool too but Ill take others opinions, answers, etc too. Kinda just curious about it as a "feature" in the game from a design standpoint.

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Cristl
#2 - 2016-02-02 05:52:38 UTC
******* forum ate my post, so now you get an abridged version: Google gimbal lock.

And it's nowhere near as annoying as it is in FPS games, especially 'Tribes', where people could jetpack over you.
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#3 - 2016-02-02 08:14:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote:
For me it mostly applied to undocking in amarr stations to make the best instaundocks but has been an issue in other times too.

OP, I know this isn't about your total issue with aligning up/down, however on this specific issue of creating instundocks on Amarr stations, if you turn on the tactical overlay, the undock will produce the altitude line from the station, so you only need to line the dot up in the centre of the tactical overlay and you'll be perfectly aligned down from the undock:

http://puu.sh/mSR32/db77e69de6.jpg

even once you pull range off the station, you'll still have the light you can line up:

http://puu.sh/mSRmf/3bc8cbbab5.jpg
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2016-02-02 10:20:23 UTC
Scipio Artelius has the right of it. Bottom out stations are the easist stations to create Insta-Out for. Turn on the tactical overview, burn down in the general direction the required distance. Then simple locate the line coming straight down from the station, burn over to it and drop an absolutely perfect bookmark.
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#5 - 2016-02-02 10:51:15 UTC
fyi, press the down arrow key and you go straight down
Another Posting Alt
Zerious Fricken Biziness
#6 - 2016-02-02 11:04:12 UTC
Insta undocks have a wider cone than what you can force up or down. Therefore not an issue.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#7 - 2016-02-02 11:17:33 UTC
Shoulda used quaternions.
Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc.
LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
#8 - 2016-02-02 12:05:57 UTC
Cristl wrote:
******* forum ate my post, so now you get an abridged version: Google gimbal lock.

And it's nowhere near as annoying as it is in FPS games, especially 'Tribes', where people could jetpack over you.

Ty for the info, was wondering what it actually was thanx. Googled.... dang math!! ShockedBig smile Thatll make my brain work overtime for the rest of the night.Twisted




Scipio et al.... yes I would do that a lot. Thanx for the tips though for others. I was alluding mostly to where I ran into this phenomenon the most not that I hadnt found a way around it just more as a way of having people know what it is to comment on it. Thanx for your replies.

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Memphis Baas
#9 - 2016-02-02 12:41:54 UTC
Don't think it's something they can fix without changing the graphics engine; it's a limitation that's built into the way they simulate 3-D. "Up" and "down" are universal, everything is aligned upright, and you can't "pass through" the vertical axis.
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#10 - 2016-02-02 18:32:26 UTC
Have you tried the first person camera yet? I haven't tried burning straight up or down with it yet, but it looks like it could be possible, as long as you can figure out where exactly straight up or straight down is.
rofflesausage
State War Academy
Caldari State
#11 - 2016-02-02 18:46:32 UTC
Gimbal lock to one side, your mind actually works much better when navigating if it has a point of reference: In this case, "up" and "down".

It's really common to see in SCUBA divers: When deep sea diving you can actually "forget" which way is up when you don't have an immediate and obvious reference point. It's really disorienting.

Yes, it's not going to be that serious in a game like Eve on a 2D screen, but reference points allow us to calculate routes, directions and movements MUCH faster.

Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc.
LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
#12 - 2016-02-02 18:58:06 UTC
rofflesausage wrote:
Gimbal lock to one side, your mind actually works much better when navigating if it has a point of reference: In this case, "up" and "down".

It's really common to see in SCUBA divers: When deep sea diving you can actually "forget" which way is up when you don't have an immediate and obvious reference point. It's really disorienting.

Yes, it's not going to be that serious in a game like Eve on a 2D screen, but reference points allow us to calculate routes, directions and movements MUCH faster.


As a diver yes I can say that that disorientation is true.


For me its not easier to orientate myself. The issue was in a system where the gate was directly above the sun and I was trying to dscan anoms to narrow on a target to drop probes. But that gimbal lock meant that I couldnt get a good narrow dscan to pinpoint the anom they were in. Was really frusterating for me. We got the kill anyway so it all worked out but it got this entire thread started as I wanted to see what that was and why.

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Iria Ahrens
Space Perverts and Forum Pirates
#13 - 2016-02-02 20:13:12 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
fyi, press the down arrow key and you go straight down


This is what I do.

My choice of pronouns is based on your avatar. Even if I know what is behind the avatar.

Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#14 - 2016-02-02 23:39:15 UTC
Drat, I've forgotten the math behind it. [I last went there >30 years ago.]

I seem to recall something about the Y-axis projection going to zero when directly overhead or below, resulting in a divide-by-zero. Might be related to rotation about all three axes (sin 0 = 0); its an arbitrary choice of which axis this happens to.

The last time I moved, my library with such things was lost Cry
Jenshae Chiroptera
#15 - 2016-02-03 00:40:05 UTC
The short cut is CTRL + D.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#16 - 2016-02-03 01:10:14 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
fyi, press the down arrow key and you go straight down

I think you have to manually bind it, but yea. undock and press down and that works rather well.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

CCP Darwin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#17 - 2016-02-03 03:00:59 UTC
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote:
Is this something CCP can fix? Is it an unintended result of something? What was the reason for it in the first place?


You've asked an insightful question! In principle it might be possible to fix it, but it would require a major reworking at the most basic mathematical level of the way Eve internally represents 3D space, would require touching nearly everything, and would yield minimal practical benefit.

The issue is a concept known as gimbal lock. When you represent an orientation in 3D space in spherical coordinates, you use three values:

Azimuth is an angle measured on a circle centered on your up/down pole. On the Earth, think of longitude.

Altitude is an angle measured on a circle perpendicular to the equator of your space. On the Earth, this angle is latitude.

Radius is the distance of an object from the center of the circle. For a sphere, all points fall at the same radius, but of course to represent all points in space, you need radius to be arbitrary.

Gimbal lock is the term for the fact that at an altitude angle of 90 or 180 degrees, in other words at either up-down pole, all azimuth values represent the same location. Furthermore, if you try to head "south" from, say, the north pole, that's ambiguous as to what direction you need to go.

Gimbal lock can cause conversions of directions from spherical to rectangular coordinates to be poorly-defined, in the sense that more than one representation can exist for the same direction. Also, using rectangular coordinates in general is not a great solution, because you often will want to consider the effect of rotating around an axis in a way that's only easy in spherical coordinates.

There are a couple of solutions. One is to use an alternate coordinate space. "Quaternions" are a common way of representing a 3D rotation in a 4D space so as to prevent any poorly-defined conversions. However, using quaternions requires that you do not attempt to apply rotations specified in spherical coordinates to the object you're modeling, otherwise you are back where you started with the gimbal lock problem.

Another solution, Eve's solution, is just to avoid orienting objects toward the poles. If you prevent rotating up more than, say, 89.5 degrees, you won't have gimbal lock problems, because you won't have valid orientations that convert to multiple representations in your coordinate scheme.

Be sure to check out Wikipedia's page on gimbal lock, particularly for the story about how gimbal lock in the physical gyroscopes of the lunar lander's inertial guidance system adversely affected Apollo 11's moon landing. NASA's solution, rather than to avoid problematic orientations, was instead to sound an audible alarm and make the system stop functioning until it was manually reset.

I think I prefer our way better, though of course we have the luxury of establishing an "up" and "down" in space, which NASA did not.

CCP Darwin  •  Senior Software Engineer, Art & Graphics, EVE Online  •  @mark_wilkins

Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc.
LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
#18 - 2016-02-03 05:13:13 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote:
Is this something CCP can fix? Is it an unintended result of something? What was the reason for it in the first place?


You've asked an insightful question! In principle it might be possible to fix it, but it would require a major reworking at the most basic mathematical level of the way Eve internally represents 3D space, would require touching nearly everything, and would yield minimal practical benefit.

The issue is a concept known as gimbal lock. When you represent an orientation in 3D space in spherical coordinates, you use three values:

Azimuth is an angle measured on a circle centered on your up/down pole. On the Earth, think of longitude.

Altitude is an angle measured on a circle perpendicular to the equator of your space. On the Earth, this angle is latitude.

Radius is the distance of an object from the center of the circle. For a sphere, all points fall at the same radius, but of course to represent all points in space, you need radius to be arbitrary.

Gimbal lock is the term for the fact that at an altitude angle of 90 or 180 degrees, in other words at either up-down pole, all azimuth values represent the same location. Furthermore, if you try to head "south" from, say, the north pole, that's ambiguous as to what direction you need to go.

Gimbal lock can cause conversions of directions from spherical to rectangular coordinates to be poorly-defined, in the sense that more than one representation can exist for the same direction. Also, using rectangular coordinates in general is not a great solution, because you often will want to consider the effect of rotating around an axis in a way that's only easy in spherical coordinates.

There are a couple of solutions. One is to use an alternate coordinate space. "Quaternions" are a common way of representing a 3D rotation in a 4D space so as to prevent any poorly-defined conversions. However, using quaternions requires that you do not attempt to apply rotations specified in spherical coordinates to the object you're modeling, otherwise you are back where you started with the gimbal lock problem.

Another solution, Eve's solution, is just to avoid orienting objects toward the poles. If you prevent rotating up more than, say, 89.5 degrees, you won't have gimbal lock problems, because you won't have valid orientations that convert to multiple representations in your coordinate scheme.

Be sure to check out Wikipedia's page on gimbal lock, particularly for the story about how gimbal lock in the physical gyroscopes of the lunar lander's inertial guidance system adversely affected Apollo 11's moon landing. NASA's solution, rather than to avoid problematic orientations, was instead to sound an audible alarm and make the system stop functioning until it was manually reset.

I think I prefer our way better, though of course we have the luxury of establishing an "up" and "down" in space, which NASA did not.

CCP rocks.

Yes I did google it as the initial respondent suggested. Even got into the quaternions for a follow up. The math was a bit above my head as its been years since I even bothered with anything beyond simple math. Thanx for the responses guys was kinda neat. But yes you guys missed a few systems where this was an issue for me to hunt targets well. ;) *cough*A2-*cough*

The coolest part about Eve is this I must admit. The depth. Any other game and your done quickly but the stuff in and out of game that you can explore is phenomenal even after 12 years.Cool

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#19 - 2016-02-03 05:29:07 UTC
CCP Darwin wrote:
gimbal lock avoidance


there is another way of dealing with that. You persist the rotation matrix between frames and only apply relative rotations to it (delta between current state and new state). Don't forget to normalize the rotation matrix once per tick or it will break real fast. Gimbal lock would only occur if you would rotate 90 degrees per frame, and you don#t want to do that anyway. Now you can have gimbal lock free rotation while using only "highschool" math and without complex numbers.

(i might have forgotten something since the last time i wrote things like that was like 15 years ago, OpenGL FTW)

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Shallanna Yassavi
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#20 - 2016-02-03 10:16:05 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
CCP Darwin wrote:
gimbal lock avoidance


there is another way of dealing with that. You persist the rotation matrix between frames and only apply relative rotations to it (delta between current state and new state). Don't forget to normalize the rotation matrix once per tick or it will break real fast. Gimbal lock would only occur if you would rotate 90 degrees per frame, and you don#t want to do that anyway. Now you can have gimbal lock free rotation while using only "highschool" math and without complex numbers.

(i might have forgotten something since the last time i wrote things like that was like 15 years ago, OpenGL FTW)


If it's only for the camera, I can see it becoming an issue in tidi fights.
If it's also server-side (I can't seem to fly straight up or down), a frame there is a second.

A signature :o

123Next page