These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why do wrecks stay stationary?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Minju Lee
Doomheim
#1 - 2013-11-29 08:41:12 UTC

This could be the kind of question that had been asked before, but-
Why do wrecks stay stationary?

Anyone with a certain extend of education would know of the law of motion, the first of which dictates that any object in motion will stay in motion unless an unbalanced force acts upon it.
Do spaceships exert forces in a way that neutralizes its state of motion, right before ceasing its function?

Please tell me my physics teacher wasn't a liar. He was a good man.
Samoth Egnoled
Caldari Provisions
#2 - 2013-11-29 09:26:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Samoth Egnoled
I believe CCP have stated that New Eden does not exist in the same universe as ours, and so the laws of physics aren't exactly the same. However it is my personaly opinion that this is a likely cover for a difficult coding task and this would be one of those occasions where the Lore has to step aside for Gameplay.
Dangirdas Bachir
The Exiled Titans
Two Vargurs one Hole
#3 - 2013-11-29 09:47:53 UTC
Because it's a damn game. And at the scale of EVE it would be hard to coordinate these wrecks to float randomly on each site they are located at. All the open space and all the missions, i think that would haul up a lot of performance for something such unnecessary.

EVE EVE STARGALACTIC CITY B I T C H
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-11-29 17:56:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitcher
You have to remember, EVE doesn't even model the orbits of planets and moons. Things slowing to a stop is a gameplay thing for convenience and ease of visualisation.

The lore explanation for why ships do it is that warp drives push against spacetime and spacetime pushes back, in exactly the same way as experienced by a submarine underwater (except that the viscosity involved is closer to that of WD40)

The lore explanation for why wrecks, asteroids and planets do it is LAUGHFLBZNNNNMMM####ERROREXPLANATIONNOTFOUND#####

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Esna Pitoojee
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#5 - 2013-11-29 17:58:09 UTC
Dangirdas Bachir wrote:
Because it's a damn game. And at the scale of EVE it would be hard to coordinate these wrecks to float randomly on each site they are located at. All the open space and all the missions, i think that would haul up a lot of performance for something such unnecessary.


This. There's a lot of things that should according to physics be constantly moving around - stations, for instance, orbiting their planets or POSes orbiting their moons. However, doing this would cause a great deal of trouble for the game - how would orbital movement be calculated? Would it count towards a ship's total velocity? How would bookmarks work - any bookmark attached to an object in space would have to be calculated to move as well. Now consider the additional load this would place on the server.

I'd also note that one point - around the Dominion expansion - there was a discussion from CCP Chronotis about introducing 'comet mining' with movable comets that would swing through a system as a replacement for ice belts. Unfortunately I the dev blog link is now dead so I can no longer access the specifics, but apparently it was dropping favor of the more recent version of Ice Belts vanishing and reappearing.
Eija-Riitta Veitonen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-12-02 06:43:51 UTC
What gets me the most is a frigate being able to effortlessly tractor beam a supercapital wreck...