These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Approaching target different way
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vypera Blackneck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2015-10-25 13:05:47 UTC
Hey everyone!

I was thinking on some ideas for a while now which I think could improve the game play and give a little more to work on for the devs.

Basically my thinking manly based on a fact that we play in a high-tech environment. So there are some - no offence - way too primitive functions we need to deal with so needs to be improved.

This one is about approaching a target. Now we have only one simple way to approach it is the shortest straight line route. Lets face it this is the worse by the game mechanics and I find it very awkward to approach a target by constantly clicking on the empty space, then rotating the camera and clicking, rotating, clicking...

Also when you try to get orbit something and you are actually not on orbiting range, your "auto pilot" takes a straight line in or out to the orbit path. Which is quite useless. On top of that we have no control which way it will orbit. So often times it try to lead us through a blob of enemy ships or bump into a large asteroid or another object blocking our way...

So instead I'd like to see a curve such like a Bezier Curve used to approach a target. In one possible way I drawn on the next pictures:
Different curves in different directions
Where each colour represent a separate curve so a different approach path.

As UI could be a single icon such as Orbit and on right click we could chose from 4 curves like above (or just type a number 0-3 where numbers would represent the "steepness" of curves) and would be saved as default for each ship just like the other quick controls like Warp to...

To use the curve we click on icon, select target (or on a pre-selected target) and the UI would show 6 options equally distributed around the straight route in every 45° (six option plus the straight line would be sufficient) so we could chose the most suitable one by moving the cursor over the curve and click on it.

The multiple direction choice would be nice to see to chose orbit path too.

Please, forgive me for my poor English, I hope I could explain it clearly enough.

Fly safe! o7

Vyp
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#2 - 2015-10-25 14:43:35 UTC
If you want to automate an approach that will minimize your exposure to fire then the proposed curves are essentially worthless since they are still a predictable path. Not only that but they would expose you to incoming fire for a greater period of time than the straight line course would.

Considering that manual piloting skills are one of the few things that can separate good pilots from the rest, I am against anything that limits or removes the advantages that manual piloting skill provides.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2015-10-25 14:59:51 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:


Considering that manual piloting skills are one of the few things that can separate good pilots from the rest, I am against anything that limits or removes the advantages that manual piloting skill provides.



^This. Learn to spiral, don't expect the game to do it for you.
Vypera Blackneck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2015-10-25 16:25:34 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:


Considering that manual piloting skills are one of the few things that can separate good pilots from the rest, I am against anything that limits or removes the advantages that manual piloting skill provides.



^This. Learn to spiral, don't expect the game to do it for you.


Yeah, thanks! Have you both read the the forum rules about this section? Would worth that one minute. You are just trolling.

Just to react your answers.
Actually I DO expect a software to do it for me if I ask it to do so.

Considering "manual" piloting... khm.. is it manual, really? Are you sure? Did you ever take your time to look at the mechanics? There is no such thing as direct manual control. So I expect some sense from the system controls my ship directly to fly in a curve to avoid bumping an asteroid, or do not fly into a group of NPC's... I could just cry out for the devs to solve it, but it is a very complicated thing to decide which way to go in 3D space SO I took my time to figure out a possible solution.

I didn't say the straight line should be taken out. But the other options added to it.
The game is not only about PVP. But in PVP you have advantage over ppl who actually don't know how to spiralling in...
They will all learn it very soon, because it is just as simple as trolling here, isn't it?
If you were not that greedy about your carebear kills then you might realise it could actually save you some mouse click since spiralling-in can't win the fight for anyone, can it? It is a must, what can be automated, because it is just a single maneuver. Every time is the same. Every single time.

Straight line death, high transversal speed life. So tell me where is that big science in this?

You guys are dogmatic, negative, ignorant but I still love you. Just because it can be done in a way it doesn't mean that's the only and the best way to do it.

o7
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2015-10-25 16:55:58 UTC
Riiiiight.

Can you please explain why you think the game should be changed to make it easier for people who can't be bothered to learn techniques that have existed for years?

Can you explain why what people refer to as manual piloting should not have an influence on fights?

Can you explain why player skill should be irrelevant and it should all come down to who has the best fit/ship/SP total?
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#6 - 2015-10-25 17:41:42 UTC
Also going to give a -1 on this idea.

Automating a computer to perform complex maneuvers that gives you an advantage in a competitive environment is tantamount to "cheating" in my opinion (much the same way "chaining" macros is).

Some things should stay "basic."

How did you Veterans start?
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-10-25 18:08:37 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5621835#post5621835

took a while to find, i need to start copypasting and indexing my BAD ideas the same way I do others' good ones.

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#8 - 2015-10-26 13:39:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Donnachadh
Vypera Blackneck wrote:
Considering "manual" piloting... khm.. is it manual, really? Are you sure? Did you ever take your time to look at the mechanics? There is no such thing as direct manual control. So I expect some sense from the system controls my ship directly to fly in a curve to avoid bumping an asteroid, or do not fly into a group of NPC's... I could just cry out for the devs to solve it, but it is a very complicated thing to decide which way to go in 3D space SO I took my time to figure out a possible solution.

If I do nothing my ship either continues on a straight line course and speed, OR it attempts to orbit a target at a specific distance and speed. To change the direction of travel or to change it's speed I have to command it to do so and that is the very definition of manually piloting. Manual piloting skills are a definite thing in this game and like so many other things in life some players are very good at it while others are not. The fact that you have not discovered how to manually pilot your ship or the fact that you are bad at manually piloting your ship is not now and never will be a reason to remove the advantages that manual piloting can give you in a fight.

Vypera Blackneck wrote:
I could just cry out for the devs to solve it, but it is a very complicated thing to decide which way to go in 3D space SO I took my time to figure out a possible solution.

You are just crying out for the devs to solve your problem. And like so many others you have the mistaken belief that we are supposed to help you refine your idea and support it simply because you think it is a good idea. Well this is the Features and Ideas section of the forums not the pat the OP on the back and reward them for a good job section. Here in Features and Ideas players post ideas and the rest of us get to explain why we think it is a good idea or a bad idea, and most of us here think this is a bad idea.
Why do we think it is a bad idea? that is quite simply really it minimizes or completely removes the advantage one gains from manually piloting their ship and that is bad.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2015-10-27 09:29:46 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
If you want to automate an approach that will minimize your exposure to fire then the proposed curves are essentially worthless since they are still a predictable path. Not only that but they would expose you to incoming fire for a greater period of time than the straight line course would.

Considering that manual piloting skills are one of the few things that can separate good pilots from the rest, I am against anything that limits or removes the advantages that manual piloting skill provides.

So in the first paragraph you say it won't successfully remove all skill, and in the second you say that we shouldn't ask for the automated functions to remove all skill.

Maybe the OP is suggesting a more basic function that increases player control and response time without affecting the skill curve much?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#10 - 2015-10-27 11:25:14 UTC
Vypera Blackneck wrote:
Actually I DO expect a software to do it for me if I ask it to do so.

Well, you can expect it to, but it will not comply with your expectations. This particular example is what differentiates a good pilot from a mere F1 drone. There is no need to replace good piloting skills with game mechanics because people cannot be bothered to become good pilots.

Not supported.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Vypera Blackneck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2015-10-29 15:54:05 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Riiiiight.

Can you please explain why you think the game should be changed to make it easier for people who can't be bothered to learn techniques that have existed for years?

Can you explain why what people refer to as manual piloting should not have an influence on fights?

Can you explain why player skill should be irrelevant and it should all come down to who has the best fit/ship/SP total?



It is really simple, because I face the issue every day. It happened countless times and still happens when I choose to orbit a stationery object (asteroid, etc) to keep my transversal kind of high on an NPC site. The problem is I approach the object with prop mod on in a path (spiralling in) then when about the right distance hit the orbit... and voila my ship decides to take a sharp turn slows down to virtually nothing because it wants to orbit on a totally different path...
Also when you are on an orbit path and flash the MWD, it happens quite often, the ship takes a sharp turn (decreasing transversal practically to 0) and starts orbiting on another random path, and will happen again at next time you fire up your MWD.

It is very annoying and frankly it must be a bug.
Vypera Blackneck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2015-10-29 15:57:34 UTC
And again for all of you who can't give a constructive feedback READ:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386386&find=unread
Vypera Blackneck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2015-10-29 16:08:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Vypera Blackneck
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Vypera Blackneck wrote:
Actually I DO expect a software to do it for me if I ask it to do so.

Well, you can expect it to, but it will not comply with your expectations. This particular example is what differentiates a good pilot from a mere F1 drone. There is no need to replace good piloting skills with game mechanics because people cannot be bothered to become good pilots.

Not supported.


I've just supported it in my previous post. hope you are happy now.

And again, I'm not against the manual piloting. I live with it.

The spiralling in and other very-very "hard" skills (clicking and double-clicking and spam-clicking) you mastered are FINE. The problem is the actual NOT-manual part, the fact the game barely cares what you actually want to do.

Now, it doesn't matter which direction you approach a target if the game thinks it different, that WILL happen even though it sometimes cost you valuable HP or a ship in certain situations.

Is it really that hard to understand a point of view that bumping an asteroid middle of a fight or actually trying to leave a site is NOT NORMAL. This is my problem.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#14 - 2015-10-29 16:42:24 UTC
Vypera Blackneck wrote:
And again for all of you who can't give a constructive feedback READ:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386386&find=unread



Constructive feed back isn't the same as agreeing with you. When someone tells you that your idea is bad AND tells you why they think it's bad - it's constructive negative feedback.
Vypera Blackneck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2015-10-29 16:59:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Vypera Blackneck
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Vypera Blackneck wrote:
And again for all of you who can't give a constructive feedback READ:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386386&find=unread



Constructive feed back isn't the same as agreeing with you. When someone tells you that your idea is bad AND tells you why they think it's bad - it's constructive negative feedback.

Yup, you're 100% right. I didn't address this to the ones who did this.

Quote:
Also going to give a -1 on this idea.
it is not the place to play jury, but to talk about ideas. The easiest thing on the world to criticise others. I expect people to think through what I said and if need to be corrected then so be it.
At the end when someone is coming up with a "-1" or other rating, actually trying to influence the crowd or the devs. So trying to prevent things happen. How constructive is that?
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#16 - 2015-10-29 17:37:48 UTC
Vypera Blackneck wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Vypera Blackneck wrote:
And again for all of you who can't give a constructive feedback READ:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386386&find=unread



Constructive feed back isn't the same as agreeing with you. When someone tells you that your idea is bad AND tells you why they think it's bad - it's constructive negative feedback.

Yup, you're 100% right. I didn't address this to the ones who did this.

Quote:
Also going to give a -1 on this idea.
it is not the place to play jury, but to talk about ideas. The easiest thing on the world to criticise others. I expect people to think through what I said and if need to be corrected then so be it.
At the end when someone is coming up with a "-1" or other rating, actually trying to influence the crowd or the devs. So trying to prevent things happen. How constructive is that?



A little advice sweetie - when pitching an idea try to at least be a little nice. This is the internet and this is an eve forum. If you come off like a tart with a superior attitude (such as linking forum rules to folks who totally know them) your idea will quickly fall under negative judgement based on your percieved attitude and not on the merits of your idea. You're pretty much baiting people into trolling you into a reaction.

As your unsollicited legal and sanity council I advise you to just ignore comments that don't sit well with you and concentrate on the constuctive legitimate feedback. If it's a crap reply, then ignore it. If it's valid +/- feedback then discuss it.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2015-10-30 03:13:24 UTC
I definitely would like to see a feature that makes entering orbit select a trajectory close to what you're already going, in the event that you're already moving perpendicular to the target.



Vypera Blackneck wrote:
Quote:
Also going to give a -1 on this idea.
it is not the place to play jury, but to talk about ideas. The easiest thing on the world to criticise others. I expect people to think through what I said and if need to be corrected then so be it.
At the end when someone is coming up with a "-1" or other rating, actually trying to influence the crowd or the devs. So trying to prevent things happen. How constructive is that?

It's fine for people to give their opinion. Also you must accept that the majority of posters on this forums as in any forum are hotheaded and emotionally driven, no matter how cool and logical they have convinced themselves that they are. To get them to like your posts, you've got to follow a few steps:
1.) make a post that they'll agree with logically
2.) make a post that pacifies them or makes them feel welcome
3.) design your post with non-insulting disclaimers to smooth over the rougher bits

It takes practice, and until then you'll get unfair hatred along with perhaps fair disliking simply because you're an amateur poster in this particular forum. Keep at it and you'll hopefully get the hang of it. And when some salty poster tries to talk you down with nonsense you know is wrong, but you can't think of any comebacks that will make the forum community side with you on, just swallow your pride and remember that these folks aren't really screwed on very tight.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#18 - 2015-10-30 06:03:32 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:
If you want to automate an approach that will minimize your exposure to fire then the proposed curves are essentially worthless since they are still a predictable path. Not only that but they would expose you to incoming fire for a greater period of time than the straight line course would.

Considering that manual piloting skills are one of the few things that can separate good pilots from the rest, I am against anything that limits or removes the advantages that manual piloting skill provides.

So in the first paragraph you say it won't successfully remove all skill, and in the second you say that we shouldn't ask for the automated functions to remove all skill.

No this is your interpretation because it fits your needs so let me restate the first paragraph.
The OP idea is to add the paths shown in the linked images to the autopilot options. The stated reason for these paths is that they will reduce your incoming damage because of their shapes. The simple reality is that outside of a certain range determined by many factors those curved paths will actually increase your exposure to incoming damage simply because it will take you lounger to close range and get "under" the guns that are shooting at you.

The second paragraph is not related to the first other than they are in the same post. In the English language it is considered proper to use a new paragraph to separate unrelated ideas or thoughts in a situation where it is not practical or possible to start a new chapter or page so that is what I did. I am truly sorry that this centuries old practice has confused you but there is nothing I can do about that. However since the second paragraph has confused you let me try to restate it and see if that helps.
The paths as shown would in the proper situation be viable as a means of reducing incoming damage. Since the request is for them to be added to the autopilot menu it is my belief that doing so would minimize the advantages that a good manual pilot has over an opponent using the autopilot. Further it is my belief that adding anything to the game that minimizes or eliminates the advantages that a good manual pilot has would be bad for the game. And on this basis I am against the OP idea.
Manes Avatarr
Superfast
#19 - 2015-10-30 09:58:03 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Considering that manual piloting skills are one of the few things that can separate good pilots from the rest, I am against anything that limits or removes the advantages that manual piloting skill provides.


^^ This. Pls to do not automate everything, Eve will become bring as hell.
Automation is needed in things like PI, industry etc, there are a lot space to improve UI. But piloting... nah. As man said.

FRONTIER ADVENTURERS Corp. | To explore, build & fight! | recruitment topic
Sigras
Conglomo
#20 - 2015-10-30 10:08:18 UTC
The OP's definition of "constructive feedback" seems to be "feedback that aligns with my POV"

This is not a good idea. "manual piloting" is one of the few things that separate someone with good player skills from someone who just clicks buttons and presses F1.

We're providing reasonable arguments as to why we dont like your idea. That isnt trolling, thats disagreeing.
12Next page