These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Inconsistencies in EVE

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#41 - 2011-12-27 00:41:01 UTC
Marduk Nibiru wrote:
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
ElQuirko wrote:
Also, surely explosions work through the combustion and expansion of air; therefore, how can we make non-nuclear explosions happen in space?


And nuclear explosions in space are basically EMP affairs. There is no atmosphere to deliver a concussive force.


Ever wonder how rockets work in space?


non-sequitur?
Barkaial Starfinder
Brazilian Vultures
Ferrata Victrix
#42 - 2011-12-27 01:00:49 UTC
Ships are harder to hit when they are close, because tracking a battleship at 1 km distance is really hard.
Yet you can hit cruisers with ease if they are 50 km away Roll



Oh, and tracking shouldn't be hard for the ship that is orbiting the target, because the guns don't need to move at all if the orbit is right. I actually thought it worked that way when I was a noob =P
Alara IonStorm
#43 - 2011-12-27 01:21:33 UTC
Barkaial Starfinder wrote:
Ships are harder to hit when they are close, because tracking a battleship at 1 km distance is really hard.
Yet you can hit cruisers with ease if they are 50 km away Roll

Smaller Circumference means the gun has to turn faster to keep up with the moving ship. If the turret mount can not move that fast it will miss

Larger Circumference and the gun has to turn less meaning it can keep up with the target.
Apollo Gabriel
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#44 - 2011-12-27 01:28:29 UTC
NOOMA
Always ... Never ... Forget to check your references.   Peace out Zulu! Hope you land well!
Velicitia
XS Tech
#45 - 2011-12-27 01:47:02 UTC
Barkaial Starfinder wrote:
Ships are harder to hit when they are close, because tracking a battleship at 1 km distance is really hard.
Yet you can hit cruisers with ease if they are 50 km away Roll



Oh, and tracking shouldn't be hard for the ship that is orbiting the target, because the guns don't need to move at all if the orbit is right. I actually thought it worked that way when I was a noob =P





small movements are magnified over distance.

A ship orbiting you at a distance of 2km, and a speed of 200 metres per second means that your guns have to track at approximately 0.1 rad/sec.

circumference circle = 2r * pi = 12.56 KM
time to travel 12.56 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 62.8 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 62.8 = 0.100...

now, at 20km, it's 10x easier for your guns to track that target.

circumference = 2r * pi = 125.66KM
time to travel 125.66 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 628.3 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 628.3 = 0.01 rad/sec


And this is going relatively slow -- 200 m/sec is essentially the slower frigates without an AB.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#46 - 2011-12-27 02:07:16 UTC
Stars that are older than the universe (do a get info on stars. Some are over 50 billion years old).

Your ship cannot correct tracking for its own movement.

Why any person would become a crew member on a capusleer's ship.

How stations can be in orbit around moons that orbit planets that orbit stars, yet everything stays in the same place.

How reprocessing an item to ore result in more mass. I thought mass was conserved, except for conversion to/from energy.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Teleni Pavle
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2011-12-27 02:26:17 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:


- the fact that there exists warp technology and torpedoes, yet all battles are fought at about maximum 100 km distance and nobody has ever thought of equipping a torpedo with a warp drive to hit targets several systems away.





Missiles that can track like fighters? This is the greatest idea I've ever heard.
Arklan1
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2011-12-27 02:33:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Arklan1
Vincent Athena wrote:
Stars that are older than the universe (do a get info on stars. Some are over 50 billion years old).

Your ship cannot correct tracking for its own movement.

Why any person would become a crew member on a capusleer's ship.

How stations can be in orbit around moons that orbit planets that orbit stars, yet everything stays in the same place.

How reprocessing an item to ore result in more mass. I thought mass was conserved, except for conversion to/from energy.


universe is 13.7 trillion years old, isn't it? no? 13.7 billion? oh forget it.

edit: never post before checking your data. i'm wrong.

inconsistencies: the invention stuff for sure. not to mention data transmission seems nonexsistent, as in we have to phsyically move blueprints and skill books, and all they are is info.
ASadOldGit
Doomheim
#49 - 2011-12-27 02:51:50 UTC  |  Edited by: ASadOldGit
Velicitia wrote:
Barkaial Starfinder wrote:
Ships are harder to hit when they are close, because tracking a battleship at 1 km distance is really hard.
Yet you can hit cruisers with ease if they are 50 km away Roll



Oh, and tracking shouldn't be hard for the ship that is orbiting the target, because the guns don't need to move at all if the orbit is right. I actually thought it worked that way when I was a noob =P





small movements are magnified over distance.

A ship orbiting you at a distance of 2km, and a speed of 200 metres per second means that your guns have to track at approximately 0.1 rad/sec.

circumference circle = 2r * pi = 12.56 KM
time to travel 12.56 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 62.8 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 62.8 = 0.100...

now, at 20km, it's 10x easier for your guns to track that target.

circumference = 2r * pi = 125.66KM
time to travel 125.66 km @ 0.2 km/sec = 628.3 sec
Tracking (rad/sec) = 2pi / 628.3 = 0.01 rad/sec


And this is going relatively slow -- 200 m/sec is essentially the slower frigates without an AB.


I think the point he was making was that, assuming the target is stationary, the ship is turning at the same rate as it's orbiting, so the guns are always pointing at the centre of the orbit - the tracking is technically being handled by the alignment speed of the ship. And, if the orbit is too tight for the ship to stay aligned to its orbit at speed, the ship slows down, so tracking shouldn't be an issue. It would get real messy, naturally, once the other ship starts moving.

Also, a frigate shooting a battleship at 1000m shouldn't have tracking issues, as the damn thing fills the guns field of view - it could fire anywhere within its firing arc and still hit it. But strangely, EVE considers a BS as a single point that needs pinpoint accuracy. Ugh A frigate should technically be able to do a strafing run all along a BS's hull, stem to stern.

This signature intentionally left blank for you to fill in at your leisure.
SmegB
Almost Dangerous
Wolves Amongst Strangers
#50 - 2011-12-27 03:39:26 UTC
Dradius Calvantia wrote:
Defecanda wrote:
Also, if EVE tried to address relative motion, it would be not be playable or certainly not fun.


I disagree. I have found many games with either Newtonian (dragless) motion or orbital mechanics not only playable, but far more rewarding and complex than games with atmospheric or other simplified flight models.

See:

Orbiter (Combat Multi-player Mod)
Infinity Combat Prototype
Jump Gate (Classic)
I-War

Even Elite managed to convey a much more realistic form of space travel than we have now.

Edit: Some of those games did have small amounts of drag, and/or some limits on top speed. However, they strove to provide as close to a realistic representation of space flight as they possibly could, and in many ways succeeded.

Edit Edit: You are not a real gamer until you can slingshot around Jupiter, Aerobrake through Saturn's outer atmosphere, and pull off an orbital injection burn to finish in a geostationary orbit around Titan (Extra points for finishing off at the Titan Saturn L1 point instead). God I love Orbiter...



EVE has hardly enough server computing power to run a large battle in one system in the game. Why are we tring to make the game more laggy. next thing you know people will want CCP to add gravity.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2011-12-27 04:45:03 UTC
SmegB wrote:
Dradius Calvantia wrote:
Defecanda wrote:
Also, if EVE tried to address relative motion, it would be not be playable or certainly not fun.


I disagree. I have found many games with either Newtonian (dragless) motion or orbital mechanics not only playable, but far more rewarding and complex than games with atmospheric or other simplified flight models.

See:

Orbiter (Combat Multi-player Mod)
Infinity Combat Prototype
Jump Gate (Classic)
I-War

Even Elite managed to convey a much more realistic form of space travel than we have now.

Edit: Some of those games did have small amounts of drag, and/or some limits on top speed. However, they strove to provide as close to a realistic representation of space flight as they possibly could, and in many ways succeeded.

Edit Edit: You are not a real gamer until you can slingshot around Jupiter, Aerobrake through Saturn's outer atmosphere, and pull off an orbital injection burn to finish in a geostationary orbit around Titan (Extra points for finishing off at the Titan Saturn L1 point instead). God I love Orbiter...



EVE has hardly enough server computing power to run a large battle in one system in the game. Why are we tring to make the game more laggy. next thing you know people will want CCP to add gravity.


Well Newtonian physics would cut any engagement PvP by hefty sum, people would actually feel awesome to be able to dock in station after few days if they have any ships left that is.
Amitious Turkey
10kSubnautic
Warriors of the Blood God
#52 - 2011-12-27 05:51:43 UTC
Defecanda wrote:
Sanadras Riahn wrote:
Defecanda wrote:
The Jovians: Big black hole of "too lazy to write in good lore"

Also, the 800 lb gorilla in the room that shouldn't be addressed:

Relative motion.


I thought this was chalked up to the Warp Drives present in each ship that somehow creating a sort of... drag.



I didn't know that. That satisfies me. Lol, thx.


So from this we can infer that CCP is fond of drag?

Shocked

I like to lick things.

Haunting the forums since 03.
Avensys
The Waterworks
#53 - 2011-12-27 08:27:57 UTC
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/misconceptions.php

EVE manages to hit pretty much every single one of these points
Aerocuker
Global Economy Experts
#54 - 2011-12-27 08:33:56 UTC
-Roids in grav sites have fixed sizes, roids in belts have random sizes.
-My missions agent sent me on a scouting mission and an NPC aggressed me, CONCORD did nothing. I swear I didn't flip his can.
-The loot NPCs drop is inconsistent with what they would actually have fitted and they tend to drop much less than what player ships drop.
-Sleepers never drop modules or ammo, despite using them.
-NPCs don't have pods.
-Only NPCs can set up structures at random places in space, I want my own safe-spot Pleasure Hub.
-NPCs never (afaik) anchor POSs at moons.
-NPC corps can print isk (bounties), player corps can't.
-The toxic cloud in Recon 3/3 inconsistently applies more damage the second time it's warped to. It however doesn't apply any damage to pods, maybe it's sentient.
-How do such violent and criminal societies even make it into space in the first place? Most of everything that players produce is directly or indirectly related to warfare.
-Can someone explain how the Black Hole anomaly in wormhole space speeds up ships but slows missiles?
Alara IonStorm
#55 - 2011-12-27 09:00:57 UTC
I have some of those answers.
Aerocuker wrote:

-Sleepers never drop modules or ammo, despite using them.

Sleeper Ships may not use Modules like Drones. Lasers have no Ammo and perhaps there Missiles Launchers Design Collapse when there reactor blows leaving no trace.
Aerocuker wrote:

-NPCs don't have pods.

Pods are for Pod Pilots. Very few people are Pod Pilots most ships are flown the conventional way such as in Star Trek / Wars or Firefly.
Aerocuker wrote:

-NPC corps can print Isk (bounties), player corps can't.

No they can not they place Bounties on NPC Outlaw Ships. That is why Navies have Tags. You can Bounties on Pod Pilot Outlaws. As for Printing ISK, as far as lore goes they earned that ISK doing whatever the Corporation does.
Aerocuker wrote:

-How do such violent and criminal societies even make it into space in the first place? Most of everything that players produce is directly or indirectly related to warfare.

War is the Engine that Drives. World War 2 netted us huge advances in Vehicles, Rockets and Jet Engines, Aeronautics, Engineering, Architecture, Production and Major Advantages in pretty much any Field. Every Country that took Major Part in the fighting lives in an area we like to call the good part of the Economy. If you are on the Internet good chance your Country played some role in it. The Cold War also pushed development on so many things. Necessity is the Mother of Invention and War is Necessity Incarnate.
Jerera
#56 - 2011-12-27 09:16:48 UTC
Avensys wrote:
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/misconceptions.php

EVE manages to hit pretty much every single one of these points


See also: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EveOnline
Alara IonStorm
#57 - 2011-12-27 09:28:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Joshua Aivoras
Tech IV Industries
#58 - 2011-12-27 09:32:59 UTC
Invention. It shouldn't be called that, as i'm not 'inventing' anything. That word would infer that the object I 'invented' never existed, and I had just created the first of its kind.


How can you 'invent' something that already exists?

95% of the players are loving EVE, the other 5%? On the forums.
Venkul Mul
Vikramaditya
#59 - 2011-12-27 09:34:08 UTC
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Please dedicate this thread to things you find inconsistent about the world of EVE. Not the game mechanics but the lore more or less.

I for one find it curious that in a society that has mastered cloning we have so many blind and scarred capsuleers around.

Surely, eyeballs can be cloned and if you are ever podded, your clone is a brand spanking tattoo free new version of you with no defects.....right? In fact, you can probably get a younger or older version of you if you want.

Just sayin What?


Those things are alterations made to the clones specifically by the request of the capsuleers themselves and are perfectly consistent with the lore. If anything the real inconsistency is the lack of customization options we have available. Gender changes, artificial body parts and age changes are just a few that should be available according to the lore.


While I dont doubt what you are saying, it does sound a bit like a cop-out when a writer has painted himself into a corner. Positive alterations I can see, but why would anyone want to be blind , scared or limited physically in any way.

Then again, we are talking about a very alien sociiety desended from what we deem as "normal" on earth.

So I pose the queston, if you had the ability to grow a new body would you place physical limitations on it and why?



1) How do you go around saying someone is blind? I see people with "funny" eyes, but those can be cyber modifications made to get better than basic sight

2) some people can have religious or philosophical reason not to get a new body unless they actually die.
If you think that the soul exist you can have trouble with a machine tramigrating it into a new body.
If you don't think the soul exist your new body is only a copy of the old one, a copy that think to be the original.
So a lot of people will wait to get a new body until they are really old or crippled. What can be ameliorated with cybernetics will not be a sufficient reason for most of them to change body.

Naturally in a universe where you can get the body you want we would have the people that do the opposite, change body (sex, age, appearance, even number of limbs or race) if they have the money for it.
Simply most capsuleers would spend the money for ships (a way to change your body, too) and not for body modifications.
Apollo Gabriel
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#60 - 2011-12-27 12:50:42 UTC
Our crews work for free and are ALWAYS ready to go and never learn or get smarter.
Always ... Never ... Forget to check your references.   Peace out Zulu! Hope you land well!