These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

Should soft body physics be included in our collision model
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#41 - 2012-11-16 03:00:06 UTC
Lag generating or not, it doesn't really matter. Collisions are cool, but given the method of control we have over are ships, I think it would be unreasonable to include them in any fashion that damages Hulls. As cool as it would be, our flight mode is relatively careless, and I think you'd see more ship destruction from a Collision model than most players would appreciate.

Double-Clicking does not amount to helm control.

That said, I'm sure you could include it in some fashion. Shield flickers, (liked the Dev blog on this feature and I hope they are going to include the shield damage model, and ship damage too), when two ships bump or collide, with variable hues and brightness based on the strength of that collision. A bright flash with lingering effects might be possible.

I could appreciate that.

Also, another potential use is to improve collision bumping effects, by applying mass and velocity equations that determine if a ship can actually bump another ship, and how much. "Ramming speed Mr. Sulu!"

I know people like bumping Freighters, but how practical is it really, when the bumping ship is less than 1% of the mass of the Freighter, and yet, at moderately high velocities it has the ability to send the Freighter reeling.

This I think, would be an acceptable and useful means of implementing this sort of collision dynamics. I'm sure that something like this is already in effect to some small degree, but it has limitations and doesn't properly account for all factors I think.

I'm sure a lot of players will scorn the idea, but I'd still appreciate something like this. Smile
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Muestereate
Minions LLC
#42 - 2012-11-16 05:19:41 UTC
I thought Concord mechanics were set off by activating an aggressive module. As far as lag goes, client side the graphics could be adjustable like many of our other graphics. That leaves a consideration of ADDITIONAL net traffic. I think the inertia, masses velocities and vectors are already in the stream. The vectors could calculate % damage with something as simple as a cosine calculation if you keep it 2dish like tracking calculations already work. We have data for shield symmetry that could be adapted for shape considerations. There is an orbit command, maybe you could tie the damage to the approach command but I'm pretty sure that would be exploitable.

This idea seems to generate tears. In Eve that's a good thing, a feature.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#43 - 2012-11-16 05:31:13 UTC
Muestereate wrote:
This idea seems to generate derision.

FTFY
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2012-11-16 05:37:13 UTC
Devon Krah'tor wrote:
next you'll be suggesting friendly fire being implemented.


Game already had friendly fire, you can blow up friendlies anytime you want. :P

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Muestereate
Minions LLC
#45 - 2012-11-16 05:37:50 UTC
nice word, whats it mean?
Shizuken
Venerated Stars
#46 - 2012-11-16 06:08:15 UTC
Mars Theran wrote:


Double-Clicking does not amount to helm control.


Also, another potential use is to improve collision bumping effects, by applying mass and velocity equations that determine if a ship can actually bump another ship, and how much. "Ramming speed Mr. Sulu!"



Both are sound ideas. Navigation really does need to be completely redone. Being able to warp to coordinates would be nice too, rather than having to have a bookmark or discrete structure to right click on an warp to.
Shizuken
Venerated Stars
#47 - 2012-11-16 06:09:15 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Devon Krah'tor wrote:
next you'll be suggesting friendly fire being implemented.


Game already had friendly fire, you can blow up friendlies anytime you want. :P


I would actually like to see weapons be blocked by obstacles, such as rocks or other ships.
Herr Hammer Draken
#48 - 2012-11-16 09:26:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Hammer Draken
I like the pyhsics of soft body collisions. Repeatadly and often. Leather and whips are optional. Big smile

And with a model even betterAttention

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2012-11-16 09:34:39 UTC
Shizuken wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
Devon Krah'tor wrote:
next you'll be suggesting friendly fire being implemented.


Game already had friendly fire, you can blow up friendlies anytime you want. :P


I would actually like to see weapons be blocked by obstacles, such as rocks or other ships.

Yeah! More calculation! That's exactly what we needed!

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
#50 - 2012-11-16 09:38:40 UTC
Yes please, i would like to see the miner bumpers faces when this comes in and they try to bump some lump of a mining or industrial ship, priceless

Tal

Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#51 - 2012-11-16 11:05:15 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
expected thread about boobies, found something about bumping physics :(


Quoted because I agree that EVE needs more jiggle. Devs - you know what to do...
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#52 - 2012-11-16 14:23:34 UTC
Came to thread expecting a thoughtful discussion about adding boob bounce to avatars.. now leaving disappointed. Ugh
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2012-11-16 14:54:15 UTC
Krell Kroenen wrote:
Came to thread expecting a thoughtful discussion about adding boob bounce to avatars.. now leaving disappointed. Ugh

I generally come into threads excepting no thoughtful discussions of any kind. I'm never disappointed, and I'm very rarely surprised.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Previous page123