These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Line of sight weapons

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ogogov
Arpy Corporation
#21 - 2012-04-05 13:54:33 UTC
Given what CCP showed us on the graphical side with collidable asteroids, I think this might actually be a good direction to head in.

Currently, it's utterly ridiculous that someone can shoot you through a station (for instance) and the terrible physics are very jarring compared to modern games. I know the technical challenges are enormous, but there's really nothing stopping CCP from rewriting the physics engine to run on openCL or CUDA which would eliminate the processing bottlenecks they are experiencing on Destiny in its current form.
impli
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2012-04-05 14:35:43 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
Shooting a corpmate and the whole Jita 4-4 undock traffick accidentally got in the way. Free loots for everyone and rage quitting for some.

Shooting a wartarget and a neutral got in the way or shooting rats in peace when a cloaked ship decloaks in your line of fire and gets hit by your guns. CONCORD comes to end your unwaranted aggression.

This is an old and often talked about topic and while it has its benefits, especially with using your environment to take cover, it can cause serious issues depending on the implementation. Primary of those issues are the serious degredation of performance and clashing with the aggression rules.

LOS causes a serious ramping up in the number of calculations the servers has to do, that scales badly when the number of ships fighting increase. Basicly it propably works fine with low numbers, but prevents the current large fleetfights entirely. This is a cost not many are willing to pay for it. The other issue is the aggression mechanics, especially highsec rules. Either it bypasses CONCORD and turns highsec to free for all warzone or CONCORD responds to accidental aggression and leads to accidental deaths and abuse of the mechanic to get easy kills by CONCORD.

As long as you want to include every ship/player piloted craft to your LOS idea, you're going to have to offer solutions to the problems it causes or try to convince people the price is worth paying. I don't think it is and haven't heard anything to make me rethink that position. Implementing limited LOS on envirionmental structures might be more practical, but I'd still choose better performance over such gimmicks, since very little fighting happens in situations where it would make any difference in the fight.


then u just have to move ur ass in the right possition to shoot on a target .. or you hv to move your ass out of line of fire .. it is the rule of the real weapon mechanics .. If i fire a balistic weapon on a target and something or someone runs through the fire .. he will also hit by the bullets .. and the police will act on me also..

I think the line of fire is a good idea and suggestion .. and makes eve even realier..
Black Dranzer
#23 - 2012-04-05 15:40:38 UTC
Technically nonviable.

I wish it were viable, I really, honestly do. But going from "1hz newtonian space balls" to the kind of thing that allows for LOS checking would be hell to program and design for.

Walking in Stations as a Social Hub: Business vs Pleasure in Incarna
Avila Cracko
#24 - 2012-04-05 16:07:18 UTC
Black Dranzer wrote:
Technically nonviable.

I wish it were viable, I really, honestly do. But going from "1hz newtonian space balls" to the kind of thing that allows for LOS checking would be hell to program and design for.


EVE had it before and then it was nerfed.
So, how is it nonviable???

truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Black Dranzer
#25 - 2012-04-05 19:02:52 UTC
Avila Cracko wrote:
EVE had it before and then it was nerfed.

..? How long ago was this? I've been a player for 7 years, and I can't recall such a thing, so it must have been really, really early on.

In either event, it may have been doable back in the days when Eve had a tiny playerbase, but given how big everything is now, it'd probably be a far bigger technical strain on the server nowadays.

Walking in Stations as a Social Hub: Business vs Pleasure in Incarna
Elder Ozzian
Perkone
Caldari State
#26 - 2012-04-06 15:30:55 UTC
The more i read this, the more i like it. CCP has a reason for innovative computing where connected clients adds up in server performance; worth more researching. And then we would have a reason for formation flight. And then shooting without lock with mouse... perhaps not =)

Anyways: My thumbs up! Too bad this is in wrong subforum.

I disagree!
ivar R'dhak
Deus est Mechanicus
#27 - 2012-04-12 13:57:03 UTC  |  Edited by: ivar R'dhak
Technically viable.
Missiles already are basically line of sight. And defender missiles can shoot them down. So making gun projectiles "invisible missiles" that can be intercepted by the first thing on their path should work.

This would change EVE drastically for the best.

Gone would be the days of the mindless blob, we´d have to learn flying in actual 3D formations to apply optimal damage to the targets.

"Ships of the line" tankers and artillery etc. would become feasible. So basically what CCP is trying now to turn EVE into(abolishing tier system, introducing roles) would suddenly make actual sense on the battlefield.
"Ships of the line" would have to start forming 3 dimensional "battle walls", for the "artillery" and logis to hide behind. Thus turning the space in-between them into death fields.

That coming micro jump mod would turn into a great tactical tool for the artillery, to jump in front of the protective wall of the tankers for a devastating salvo. Then quickly having to scramble back behind the "shields" of the tankers.
Similar to the line relief system of a roman legion.

And what´s best, CCP Greyscale would have to finally give up his anti-formation attitude.Twisted
Because we would of course need automatic formation flying to pull the above off.

Naturally all this would increase the possibility of eff-ups SOO much. Twisted

I´d also leave the friendly fire thing in, especially in empire. The gankers have it all too easy anyway and empire wars should be risky businesses for the attacker too. The new wardec sys is buttering griefers way too much anyway.
EVE is hard. P
It should be the case for griefers too.
ivar R'dhak
Deus est Mechanicus
#28 - 2012-04-12 14:31:41 UTC
Ogogov wrote:
I know the technical challenges are enormous, but there's really nothing stopping CCP from rewriting the physics engine to run on openCL or CUDA which would eliminate the processing bottlenecks they are experiencing on Destiny in its current form.
As the client can´t be trusted his equipment is useless here, thus openCL and Cuda are irrelevant.

No, this is a server only problem.
And the recent server-side missile improvements are making me hope this will be finally feasible.
Joran Dravius
Doomheim
#29 - 2012-04-15 10:19:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Joran Dravius
Crucis Cassiopeiae wrote:
Can you please make all weapons hit first thing that is on its path?
It will make EVE so much more interesting.
And, its logical. How can bullet pass one ship and hit other? And it cant be that smart to go around the first ship.
In real world only missiles can do some flight correction while in flight, and that's only for stationary things and only if it have long time for reaction (cruise missiles will go around stationary buildings and follow surface of earth). And that's because you have room to put smart computer with sensors in it. You cant put computer and sensors in bullet.

Please, consider this, it will make EVE feel like new game.
Imagine:
Titan as shield - you deploy your own playground Big smile
Miner in belt - suicide ganker cant just shot you if you are on other side of the rock - next time prepare your gank
Station games - he shoot on you but - part of station is on path Big smileBig smileBig smile - be a little more aware next time you shoot someone at the station.

I just saw that i posted in wrong forums.
sorry. Oops

Speaking as someone who was around when missiles had splash damage, that would make high sec uninhabitable for combat characters. What would happen is cloaked ships would fly into your line of fire while you're doing a mission or something and get you concordokkened any time they feel like it. It would basically turn high sec into 0.0. Anyone could kill anyone whenever they wanted. You might as well suggest removing high sec from the game. Personally, I'd love it if high sec was removed, but I don't think anyone else that lives there would.
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2012-04-15 13:39:13 UTC
Hope to God I don't get between an AC Mael and it's target :ouch:

Sugar Von MurdererTits : Jake Warbird gets my vote for most intriguing and attractive male character in Eve.
ivar R'dhak
Deus est Mechanicus
#31 - 2012-04-19 18:05:19 UTC  |  Edited by: ivar R'dhak
Joran Dravius wrote:
Speaking as someone who was around when missiles had splash damage, that would make high sec uninhabitable for combat characters. What would happen is cloaked ships would fly into your line of fire ..
concordokkened

Yeah, that was the reason they removed that. And nobody really wants it back.
Defeating the above highsec griefing option should be part of the collision detection check for gun projectiles/rays. Obviously in high and low sec accidentally hitting a cloaker should not trigger a concord response.

This would also lead to an interesting new way of uncloaking peeps at gatecamps. Twisted
Not sure but a missile flyby is able to decloak somebody, right? Or is it only drones?
Saorlan
Fight Club Outfit
DammFam
#32 - 2012-04-19 18:33:11 UTC
This is an excellent idea and totally realisable with todays technology. Has anyone heard of PlanetSide 2? That is a full FPS the same as it earlier incarnation PlanetSide 1 - that had 399 players on one map. PS 2 is likely to have far more than that and the server will be doing a hell of a lot more that los calculations.

This would really make eve nearly perfect. Only real piloting and FPS combat would make it perfect but this would be a step in the right direct.
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#33 - 2012-04-20 12:55:17 UTC
Elder Ozzian wrote:
Too bad this is in wrong subforum.


Pretty much this. The home for this is "features and ideas", and I'm moving it there now.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#34 - 2012-04-20 13:28:38 UTC

This has been proposed for almost a decade (really).


CCP has generally said it's too much load and not scalable for massive fights (when you have 1500 people on grid, if the server has to figure out a calculation for each person shooting at each other person's line of sight, we're talking about over 2.25 million possible combinations to figure out (including friendly fire, reps and so on).

I think it would be better if they just focused on static objects or perhaps massive ones (stations, titans, asteroids) as being potential cover obstacles.

Also, missiles should obviously be able to go around those obstacles in "indirect fire". But, that's another calculation i imagine.

Likelihood of happening? Pretty Low.


However, as someone pointed out with the asteroid collisions, this is something that CCP years ago would have said was an impossibility for the server. But they don't even seem to be hesitating about it. Either those asteroids will be local simulation only on collision (they won't be shared amongst all players) - or they figured out a way to do complicated calculations on a scalable level.


Where I am.
Quade Warren
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2012-04-20 14:05:55 UTC
Ogogov wrote:
Given what CCP showed us on the graphical side with collidable asteroids, I think this might actually be a good direction to head in.

Currently, it's utterly ridiculous that someone can shoot you through a station (for instance) and the terrible physics are very jarring compared to modern games. I know the technical challenges are enormous, but there's really nothing stopping CCP from rewriting the physics engine to run on openCL or CUDA which would eliminate the processing bottlenecks they are experiencing on Destiny in its current form.



I was thinking the same thing when I saw the videos at Fanfest. It really does seem like they are moving in that direction, which I think CCP has wanted to do for a long time. They have had a vision and they've just been steadily trudging towards it. I applaud them for their dedication.

And as for everyone pointing out that Concord would be a problem, that is only if Concord stayed in its current form. We can all acknowledge that Concord would cause serious problems if LOS weapons were implemented, especially in traffic heavy areas of Jita. This may also point out that docking in its current form is a result of a lack of LOS.

In a world where line of sight mattered, why would we dock on the opposite end of a station from the docking bay? We may want to argue that making only a certain part of the station capable of accepting docking requests would make someone vulnerable, but we have to consider that if you cannot shoot through a station anymore at this point and an autopilot docking my warp you to the point needed to dock, not on the opposite end of a station. Collisions, bumping, the whole nine yards could be a problem.

If being ganked next to Jita is a problem, give the station jamming capability. If the person doing the ganking destroys the ship in an alpha, jam and destroy the ship doing the ganking. Taper the capabilities of a station to follow the security level of the area.

tl;dr : All the problems I've seen pointed out are the result of taking the current world paradigm and suddenly shoving LOS into it. A LOS world cannot function with how the game mechanics are currently set up, so most arguments I've seen are null and void.
ugh zug
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-04-20 14:08:01 UTC
nice idea, but the additional load on the server for this kind of tech alone makes it impossible.

Want me to shut up? Remove content from my post,1B. Remove my content from a thread I have started 2B.
Quade Warren
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2012-04-20 15:41:05 UTC
ugh zug wrote:
nice idea, but the additional load on the server for this kind of tech alone makes it impossible.


This is one problem I will not dispute. It seems like the problem of calculating interceptions is borderline, if not outright, the "traveling salesman" problem.
Ogogov
Arpy Corporation
#38 - 2012-04-23 13:23:15 UTC
ivar R'dhak wrote:
Ogogov wrote:
I know the technical challenges are enormous, but there's really nothing stopping CCP from rewriting the physics engine to run on openCL or CUDA which would eliminate the processing bottlenecks they are experiencing on Destiny in its current form.
As the client can´t be trusted his equipment is useless here, thus openCL and Cuda are irrelevant.

No, this is a server only problem.
And the recent server-side missile improvements are making me hope this will be finally feasible.


I think you're completely misunderstanding what I said.

I was referring to a serverside farm of stream computing devices for physics computation, not client-side. This would effectively eliminate their processor bottleneck for this kind of performance, and the approach is already used in HPC applications.
Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#39 - 2012-04-23 15:56:21 UTC
LOS comes up in a lot of threads looking for solutions for Blob warfare and it's a great idea that apparently cannot practically be implemented. As previously noted it would put a huge kink in the suicide ganker's life on Jita IV undock and that would really tickle me pink, but oh well. It'd also add a lot of risk to the job of a tackler.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#40 - 2012-04-23 17:53:25 UTC
Joran Dravius wrote:

Speaking as someone who was around when missiles had splash damage, that would make high sec uninhabitable for combat characters. What would happen is cloaked ships would fly into your line of fire while you're doing a mission or something and get you concordokkened any time they feel like it. It would basically turn high sec into 0.0. Anyone could kill anyone whenever they wanted. You might as well suggest removing high sec from the game. Personally, I'd love it if high sec was removed, but I don't think anyone else that lives there would.


Fixable with 3 things:

Weapon will not shoot unless it will hit the intended target (Can be turned off),
Missile will self destruct before hitting unintended target (Can be turned off),
CONCORD gives no penalty for accidentally hitting a cloaked ship.

Now on the other side there is the N cubed issue. The work needed by the server scales as number of ships cubed if we have LOS.

It increases with the number of ships shooting
It increases with the number of ships that could be hit
It increases with the number of players that must be informed of the results.

One way to reduce this is the same way we have hit and miss shots shown now: I only see it for my ship. That is I see LOS results for shots I take and shots at me, but for person x shooting person Y, it looks like all shots hit the intended target even if they do not.

CCP wants to make the servers able to use multi-core processors. If they can LOS calculations become more viable.

Question for CCP: Right now TiDi cuts in at around 1000 ships on a reinforced node. Any idea where it would cut in if we had LOS weapons?

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction