These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page123Next page
 

Physics based bump?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dalloway Jones
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2014-04-28 01:27:42 UTC
When a frigate bumps a freighter the frigate should explode. Big smile
Winifred Running Goat
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2014-04-28 02:27:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Winifred Running Goat
Tweek Etimua wrote:
DaReaper wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
DaReaper wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Why can space ships collide into other ships, asteroids, and buildings, but they can still shoot their weapons through them as if they're not there?

It would be fun to use a large collidable structure as cover to lose LoS and prevent some attacks.

I dunno, i guess Tactical positioning within your environment is too hard, and the community full of risk averse carebears demand Easy Mode PvP. Which is also demonstrated as being the case when a 10 year veteran doesn't want skill training time decreased so he may hold onto his advantage.

EvE Online? More like, EasyMode Online



when i first started playing this was a problem. If you fired missiles and a rat or shipping happen to be behind an asteroid, the missile would hit the asteroid and cause splash damage. As there was no way to navigate around roids easily this was a very annoying mechanic. They changed this in kali (Cold War) i think


O well that makes sense.

I guess that kind of contradicts the opinion I'm told about EvE being all about PvP, when CCP themselves have made a change to improve their playerbase's ability to PvE easier.

Thanks for the information.



It was not just PVE. It was annoying as hell. Because you could not see that billy bob was behind the roid. Several times i was saved a few seconds in pvp back in the day because a missile would not hit me, and other times i missed a kill for the same reason. You would have a clear line of site, but still hit an asteroid. So it went both ways and was a huge change for the better. Also you would fire and have a clear line but your missile would hit the asteroid right next to you as it was getting its barrings, and due to splash damage you would blow up.

Anoying maybe but I like the idea. It means pilots would have to pay attention.




It's a f***ing GAME ! wtf

edit: no, i don't want more server load.

[b] no, i don't want more server load.

[u]WARNING: If you don’t post alot you will become “Inactive fa**ot” instead of “Bitter vet”[/u][/b]
Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2014-04-28 02:34:19 UTC
Tweek Etimua wrote:
Destoya wrote:
E = 0.5*m*(v^2)

Sorry I'm an idiot with math and some science. ....


Kinetic Energy
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2014-04-28 03:21:00 UTC
yo .. EVE physics is Rubber ducks in bath tub ... savvy ?
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#25 - 2014-04-28 03:27:41 UTC
DaReaper wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:



It was not just PVE. It was annoying as hell. Because you could not see that billy bob was behind the roid. Several times i was saved a few seconds in pvp back in the day because a missile would not hit me, and other times i missed a kill for the same reason. You would have a clear line of site, but still hit an asteroid. So it went both ways and was a huge change for the better. Also you would fire and have a clear line but your missile would hit the asteroid right next to you as it was getting its barrings, and due to splash damage you would blow up.

Anoying maybe but I like the idea. It means pilots would have to pay attention.



I don;t think you are quite getting what i am saying, but that would be because you are not old enough to have lived with that mechanic so its ok. There was no 'oh pilots need to pay attention' It did not matter how well you were paying attention, your missiles would randomly crash into asteroids that were no where near where you were shooting your target. You would get a 'missile hits asteroid doing 0 damage' and go WTF there is not roid in the way! Fire again and it would smash into some random asteroid off to the left. So you reposition and it would again slam into the same asteroid on the left. It was a **** mechanic that never worked.

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.
Michael Ruckert
Hohere Kavallerie-Kommando
#26 - 2014-04-28 03:42:05 UTC
Posting in stealth "EVE is not real" thread.

"No matter how well you perform there's always somebody of intelligent opinion who thinks it's lousy." - Laurence Olivier
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#27 - 2014-04-28 03:58:56 UTC
You won't see realistic physics without adding a heavy load to the server. This isn't a physics sandbox like Garry's mod etc

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#28 - 2014-04-28 04:04:31 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


While I am aware of those, you're missing my point.

None of them are so literally game breaking as to warrant recoding the entire physics engine. The development time is better spent elsewhere. Anywhere else.

True. A general slow down doesn't call for an entire recoding. Just a *0.25 or something in the basic formula.

I personally believe that once we go entirely DX11, we can then use tessellation for not just better graphics but also a better physics engine, since we 'should' no longer need the giant collision bubbles at that point, but can actually do skin to skin collisions without melting the servers, per their Tessellation tech demo of lots of roids breaking apart into smaller ones as they impact on a ship.

But that's several years off at least before we drop DX 9 support. Much as they have started DX11 support so as to iron out the bugs now rather than start trying in a sudden change over.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#29 - 2014-04-28 04:11:07 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

True. A general slow down doesn't call for an entire recoding. Just a *0.25 or something in the basic formula.



See, I'm not sure it's as simple as just changing a few numbers in a formula or something.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#30 - 2014-04-28 04:20:44 UTC
Webvan wrote:
You won't see realistic physics without adding a heavy load to the server. This isn't a physics sandbox like Garry's mod etc



one of the reasons why i think another game won;t be as people think

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#31 - 2014-04-28 04:28:47 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

See, I'm not sure it's as simple as just changing a few numbers in a formula or something.

Possibly not quite that simple as that, but I'm sure somewhere in the vector maths has to be a mass/velocity/momentum part of the equation. It depends if they tied it in with anything else crazy directly and changing the variable by a small factor would suddenly result in stations & POS's being bumpable or something.

I wouldn't think it would, but you never know since it's early EVE code.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#32 - 2014-04-28 04:36:11 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

See, I'm not sure it's as simple as just changing a few numbers in a formula or something.

Possibly not quite that simple as that, but I'm sure somewhere in the vector maths has to be a mass/velocity/momentum part of the equation. It depends if they tied it in with anything else crazy directly and changing the variable by a small factor would suddenly result in stations & POS's being bumpable or something.

I wouldn't think it would, but you never know since it's early EVE code.


I wouldn't think something as drastic as bumping stations, but as far as a now defunct submarine simulator turned into a space mmo?

Who knows?

That's part of why I take these "change the code!" suggestions with a hunk of salt. Because a lot of people seem to think that you can just wave the magic wand of computer code and make something happen. I've worked with a fair amount of code in my time, and nothing nearly as complicated as EVE must be. Especially if all the "lack of documentation" stuff is even close to true.

Ever seen a poorly put together server farm? With all the wires criss-crossing and going everywhere, and who knows what connects to what. I need this plug, but I have to follow the wire to make sure it doesn't disconnect something important when I do use it.

Now imagine that instead of wires, it's millions of lines of text.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#33 - 2014-04-28 04:39:22 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


I wouldn't think something as drastic as bumping stations, but as far as a now defunct submarine simulator turned into a space mmo?

Who knows?

That's part of why I take these "change the code!" suggestions with a hunk of salt. Because a lot of people seem to think that you can just wave the magic wand of computer code and make something happen. I've worked with a fair amount of code in my time, and nothing nearly as complicated as EVE must be. Especially if all the "lack of documentation" stuff is even close to true.

Ever seen a poorly put together server farm? With all the wires criss-crossing and going everywhere, and who knows what connects to what. I need this plug, but I have to follow the wire to make sure it doesn't disconnect something important when I do use it.

Now imagine that instead of wires, it's millions of lines of text.


Yep to both servers & code. I'm not a pro (yet) but I've done plenty of amateur level work including online projects like the 200+ user NWN Persistent world coding, and they had some truly terrible early code work done on them, that didn't even have any kind of psuedo code pattern at all. let alone documentation.

Best bug we had on that team was the time we fixed the 'event' code which was broken and made it so timed events could be set to run..... Then we discovered that the server clock code had been broken for years and no-one had even noticed till us.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#34 - 2014-04-28 04:48:37 UTC
Yeah, I have a past distinction in that field that I shall not share, as the last time I did I got doxed, but I know what you're talking about. Promised myself I wouldn't ever do code cleanup again without a damned good reason.

Got into a different area of the tech field instead. But as a result of my past experience, I hold a considerable amount of respect for our code monkey brethren. They don't get enough appreciation, especially from the average player.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Trevor Dalech
Nobody in Local
Of Sound Mind
#35 - 2014-04-28 05:16:52 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Tweek Etimua wrote:
Destoya wrote:
E = 0.5*m*(v^2)

Sorry I'm an idiot with math and some science. ....


Velocity is squared.

That means that as speed increases, energy increases exponentially. As mass increases, it increases linearly.

In dumb dumb terms, fasta make stuff move way fartha, fatta make stuff move a lil fartha.




Polynomially, not exponentially. Exponentially would be if there were an e^v somewhere (or any other base.) other than that your point still stands, changes in velocity have a larger effect on kinetic energy than changes in mass.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#36 - 2014-04-28 11:07:17 UTC
Trevor Dalech wrote:
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Tweek Etimua wrote:
Destoya wrote:
E = 0.5*m*(v^2)

Sorry I'm an idiot with math and some science. ....


Velocity is squared.

That means that as speed increases, energy increases exponentially. As mass increases, it increases linearly.

In dumb dumb terms, fasta make stuff move way fartha, fatta make stuff move a lil fartha.




Polynomially, not exponentially. Exponentially would be if there were an e^v somewhere (or any other base.) other than that your point still stands, changes in velocity have a larger effect on kinetic energy than changes in mass.


Pah :P
Solecist Project
#37 - 2014-04-28 11:20:57 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


While I am aware of those, you're missing my point.

None of them are so literally game breaking as to warrant recoding the entire physics engine. The development time is better spent elsewhere. Anywhere else.

True. A general slow down doesn't call for an entire recoding. Just a *0.25 or something in the basic formula.

I personally believe that once we go entirely DX11, we can then use tessellation for not just better graphics but also a better physics engine, since we 'should' no longer need the giant collision bubbles at that point, but can actually do skin to skin collisions without melting the servers, per their Tessellation tech demo of lots of roids breaking apart into smaller ones as they impact on a ship.

But that's several years off at least before we drop DX 9 support. Much as they have started DX11 support so as to iron out the bugs now rather than start trying in a sudden change over.
That's not how it works.

There is absolutely no connection between the physics bubbles and the triangles on the models.

Besides that, tesselation adds *virtual* triangles that aren't even there on any model.
That's why it's so awesome.

And how you can make a connection between client gfx and servercode is beyond me.


It was a techdemo ... nothing more.
Can't even blame you ... but CCP definitely.


Whereever you got that odd "wisdom" from ... forget it for your own sake.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Riyria Twinpeaks
Perkone
Caldari State
#38 - 2014-04-28 11:30:09 UTC
They should just make shields visible as spheres whenever they are hit by weapons or bumped into. Would make for awesome-looking effects and make the elastic bumps more believable since seeing the shield-spheres collide directly tell you that this is not a normal collision between two material objects ;D
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#39 - 2014-04-28 11:43:20 UTC
Tweek Etimua wrote:
Destoya wrote:
E = 0.5*m*(v^2)

Sorry I'm an idiot with math and some science. ....


Yet you asked a question about math and science...

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Hlokk Skoggangur
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2014-04-28 11:52:37 UTC
Submarine simulation aside for a minute, real(tm) physics if feasible would probably ruins many peoples day. To take an example, lets say this extends to other objects in space. While switching from bumping miners to bowling mining fleets out with astroids would be insanely fun and look awesome, I am not sure anyone would enjoy the pure shocked whine that would create.

Still, taking out a fleet with an expanding cloud of astroids bouncing off each other would look very cool.
Previous page123Next page