Player Features and Ideas Discussion

That's ship's speed and acceleration.

If you can't see what is going wrong, I recommend you to visit this site and do the quiz, funny and educative, and you may find "wow I should have realized that!"


Unrealistic features are fine for a game, usually, as they are necessary to maintain the balance and compensate the reality that we can not fully stimulate the real world. And unrealistic features are often introduced to improve the gaming experience at a cost of some lesser gaming experience.

However in this case I call it "passive unreality", which brought passively to the game by the designers' ignorance(probably). That's understandable since stastically non of us ever lived in the space, but it ought to be fixed.

Op-positing the "positively unrealistic" features such as no collision damages, docking rules, or reinforcement timers and funny "sov claim mechanism", "passively unrealistic" features were not introduced to make a better game. Certainly fixing them will consume development resource, but leaving them there will only have negative effects.

Another example of "passive unreality" could be "missile with aerodynamic design/support wings" (check the in-game model for missiles, lol) this is a minor issue I won't start a topic for it, though.


Where does the unrealistic mechanism affect the game:
1, Agility
Current: Accelerating a spaceship takes equal time as stopping it.
In real: Stopping a spaceship is usually more difficult than speeding it up (unless it has the powerful thrusters on the head as well)

2, Afterburners:
Current: Spaceship automatically slow down when afterburner stop working.
In real: Spaceship is moving at the same speed after afterburner was stopped. However, if the speed is decreased by other forces, the spaceship will not regain speed, unless the afterburner is turned on again.

3, Bumping:
Current: The ship being bumped will automatically slow down and stop, despite of the fact that its thruster was not turned on. (If asteroid could stop like that, then, Earth is safe)
In real: When a spaceship is bumped , it will keep moving towards the direction at the accelerated full speed, unless the pilot try to stop or move away


People assuming themselves are sci-fi fan, but playing a spaceship game that uses air-resistance physics model, which is hilarious. I hope CCP already have this on their list, after all EVE could be more interesting to players with high-school physics background, I assume they're the majority.

It always amuses me when people try to claim that fictional technology can only work a certain way, based on the laws of physics.

While ignoring that our understanding of physics is seriously incomplete.

Also while ignoring given explanations. In this case, warp drives produce a drag effect on on the ship, giving it a much lower top speed than you would otherwise get without one.

Don't like that explanation? Build a warp drive and show us how it actually works.

I can imagine EVE with the physics from this topic, without obvious problems.

If you can tell what's will be totally wrong and unbalanced, I would really appreciate it

If it was what CCP claimed, I would be fine with that

Real life physics do apply in eve, such as when you fire at people they will get damaged, lol

I don't understand where people read "max speed" from the post, maybe because they did thought a lot about it themselves and my post stirred their past memory up.


Secondly, you fall into the "perfectionist fallacy ". "If we can't implement real life physics in full, we won't care about it", and "If we can't totally stop criminals, we won't care about it".
Apologize for the inappropriate analog, but I hope I have made it clear, lol.


As above, I forgive your generalization on "real physics engine" or such, but if there is a big issue for a "different" physics model needs evidence or expert explanation. You assuming it gonna be difficult, which is understandable, but could be wrong.

Take 2 characters and a couple of ships and go fire on one to low structure.

Have a close look and see how much damage there is.

No real physics involved.

I guess you made a good point that ccp may actually look at.

If you want another example: When you anchor a POS, they stay at the moon orbit.

Eve basically follows Star Trek physics instead of Battlestar Galactica physics.

Warp drive fails you drop out of warp. Ships lean when they turn as if they are flying. With the exception of collision, you could render the Enterprise and fly it around EVE and it would behave like it did in the TV shows. I dont remember anyone complaining about any of that back then. Its just done because it looks neat and the average person does not understand how things move in space. As for EVE, its done for 2 reasons.

1. Much less server load.

2. Its more predictable. We dont fly our ships the computer does, so the way the ship reacts needs to be fluid for us to control them.

I agree that changing the way the ship behaves visually to make it look more realistic (no more banking and more drifting) but not going as far as actually changing the mechanics might be an idea however.

I suppose that banking when orbiting would make sense as well. Much less calculations since the turrets dont have to move as much, and its just minor pitch corrections with the thrusters on the bottom of the ship going non stop instead of just being a block in space trying to make a circle.

…you rotate around your centre of gravity while maintaining the same direction of travel. When your thrusters are pointing in that direction, you light them and slow down. You see, there is no front or back; up or down; even left or right. There's only a centre of mass, a main thrust vector, a velocity vector, and possibly — hopefully — some directional adjustment thrusters that slew the ship around the aforementioned centre of mass.

…and movement through space isn't one of them. Instead, they tend to be around to provide additional thrust to (what usually is) some kind of compression system when that compression alone isn't providing enough oomph. Since vacuum doesn't offer much to compress, there is no need for an afterburner to add anything — you just turn up the remass flow.

Not me, personally, no, but other than that, it's a pretty trivial problem.

The fields are always active as long as the ship is. Don't confuse the field with the travel method. Also, read the lore.