These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

How would gameplay change, if newtonian physics would be used?

Author
Neeko Demus
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2013-11-10 19:56:41 UTC
As a physicist I can't help myself but to think "This is so wrong", everytime I undock. Think of it, as if you would see an Amarr strained at a leash by a Minimatar.

I know there have been a handfull of threads about this topic. I don't want to stack the next "Make EVE more realistic" thread containing mostly "Don't break our EVE"-Posts on the pile. I neither expect nor want EVE to be a fully realistic spacecraft simulator. But I would prefer the look and feel of Newtonian Physics in EVE quite a lot. (Playing an other game is not an option.)

But I also try to consider the gameplay changes, that would be implied by a major change of the physics:


  1. No top speed, no limits?
  2. As the only top speed in the universe is the speed of light in vacuum, space ships at non-relativistic velocities (<30% Lightspeed) have no need to stop accelerating at max 5 km/s (~0.0017% Lightspeed) or lower. But what happens, if a player sets his vessel to max acceleration and goes afk for a couple of hours?

    To answer this question, we have to define that max acceleration first. Let's assume a really fast frigate with just one capsuleer. He may endure forces, a normal human wouldn't. So let's assume a constant acceleration of 50 g (about the highest acceleration a human has withstood click). This means 500 m/s² -> 30 km/s after a minute, 1800 km/s after an hour and so on. It would take over 6 hours to cover a distance of 1 AU and 1 day to reach 13 AU, flying at 14.7% lightspeed at that point. At this point the downtime would end the trip.

  3. Fights at high velocities
  4. Let's assume, you're sitting in an Interceptor, as an enemy fleet drops out of warp at about 100 km from your position. Your FC orders you to burn to them. Let's say you get as fast as 5 km/s. So you would need about 20 seconds to cover the distance.(Correct me, if I'm wrong. Never flown a fleet interceptor.) What would happen, if you are not limited to 5 km/s but to about 50 g? You would also cover the distance in 20 seconds, but would reach the fleet with a velocity of 10 m/s.

  5. Orbiting
  6. An other issue is orbiting. As there is no max velocity, one can always reach the ideal velocity for the radius, given by
    v=sqrt(a*R) v=>velocity, a=>acceleration, R=>orbital radius
    assuming, that the centrifugal force, necessary to maintain the orbit, comes from the thrusters of the orbiting ship.

    Let's say, our 50 g-Ship would like to orbit an other ship at 40 km. Then it would need to reach a orbital velocity of 1414 m/s (angular velocity 0.03 rad/s). That would be reached in less than 3 seconds from 0 velocity. But if the ship approaches with 10 km/s, it would have to decelerate, what would take about 17 seconds.


Hard to control
Most people are concerned about controlling spacecrafts will become a lot harder in this scenario. We are used to the behaviour of cars or planes. So the behaviour of spaceships is hard to get used to. But what would really change? The most maneuvers are performed by pressing one button. What's speaking against keeping it that way. If you order the ship, to orbit at x km, you press the button, and the computer calculates the necessary maneuvers.

What do you think? Are these major impacts on gameplay, or are they rather specific? Have I forgotten something?

And again: This thread isn't about turning EVE into a spacecraft simulator. It is about the impacts, newtonian physics would have onto gameplay. I'm not insisting, that CCP has to change the game.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#2 - 2013-11-10 19:57:49 UTC
Ramming would be a viable tactic and goons would be all over it.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#3 - 2013-11-10 19:59:22 UTC
It would be all-missiles, all the time, since they'd be the only ones who could ever hit anything. Maybe with the odd drone thrown in for good measure…

Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-11-10 20:01:01 UTC
Tippia wrote:
It would be all-missiles, all the time, since they'd be the only ones who could ever hit anything. Maybe with the odd drone thrown in for good measure…


A good argument could be made for railguns as a means of propulsion.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#5 - 2013-11-10 20:04:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Lyris Nairn wrote:
A good argument could be made for railguns as a means of propulsion.
Arty vs Railguns = chemical vs (electro) magnetic accelerators.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#6 - 2013-11-10 20:06:59 UTC
Also, while not Newtonian physics exactly, there would be no cloaks and the only ships that anyone could fly would be Minmatar — all other races would have died long ago due to overheating.
Skeln Thargensen
Doomheim
#7 - 2013-11-10 20:09:00 UTC
you'd need to carry around a lot of propellent.

forums.  serious business.

Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#8 - 2013-11-10 20:10:18 UTC
Neeko Demus wrote:
Have I forgotten something?


In point 1, you are ignoring fuel consumption of a finite resource and the mass of the initial fuel loading. If we are conducting a Newtonian thought experiment here, then we should really be including realistic constraints upon what is delivering the accelerating force.
Ghost Phius
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2013-11-10 20:11:50 UTC
There were a couple of I-WAR games that tried it with cruiser/battlecruiser sized ships and flying was hard and unfun.

Having said that I think Star Citizen is taking a crack at it with litte fighters...Oh my the tears from that will be delicious.Pirate
stoicfaux
#10 - 2013-11-10 20:55:40 UTC  |  Edited by: stoicfaux
If you want to remove all doubt about the funness of newtonian space flight, play MANTIS.

edit: And when I say "funness" I mean the opposite.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Icarus Able
Refuse.Resist
#11 - 2013-11-10 20:56:21 UTC
Eve is in a newtonian universe. The gameplay oddness is caused by handwavium given off by the warp drives having to be constantly active therefore causing a "drag" on the ship.
stoicfaux
#12 - 2013-11-10 20:58:53 UTC
Lyris Nairn wrote:
Ramming would be a viable tactic and goons would be all over it.

Hell, ramming planets would be a viable tactic.

Obligatory link to Atomic Rockets/Project Rho: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacegunexotic.php#id--Relativistic_Weapons--The_Killing_Star


Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

voetius
Grundrisse
#13 - 2013-11-10 21:23:57 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
If you want to remove all doubt about the funness of newtonian space flight, play MANTIS.

edit: And when I say "funness" I mean the opposite.


or got to SourceForge and download VegaSpace, Newtonian physics is very different from what we have in EVE.
Layla Firoue
Doomheim
#14 - 2013-11-10 21:39:32 UTC
Ghost Phius wrote:
There were a couple of I-WAR games that tried it with cruiser/battlecruiser sized ships and flying was hard and unfun.

Having said that I think Star Citizen is taking a crack at it with litte fighters...Oh my the tears from that will be delicious.Pirate


The I-War games were awesome, hard to master? YES! "Unfun"? NO!. It had a very unforgiving gameplay and it took you awhile to learn how to use the ship in combat but once you mastered it, it was a hell lot of fun.

Accelerating in all directions while showering your enemy with particle fire was really funny. Besides it used a travel mode called LDS to cover great distance. Combat wasn´t possible during LDS travel, you had to disrupt it first and drop speed to a more manageable level. Very nice concept but as I already said it took time to get used to. Other than that the "space feeling" was 100 times better than submarines in molasses physics EvE has.


Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#15 - 2013-11-10 22:18:23 UTC
Newtonian physics does not respect the speed of light as a speed limit. That is a purely relativistic thing (and the identification of the speed of light as a cosmic speed limit was proof that Newtonian physics were wrong).

The key issue that comes to mind would be that Newtonian physics would provide no way for webifiers to work, and you would see engagements take place at much longer range as ships would be moving much faster relative to each other. (This would mean that grids and ranges would probably be 50-100 times what they are now).

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Knights Armament
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-11-10 22:23:03 UTC
Neeko Demus wrote:
As a physicist I can't help myself but to think "This is so wrong", everytime I undock. Think of it, as if you would see an Amarr strained at a leash by a Minimatar.

I know there have been a handfull of threads about this topic. I don't want to stack the next "Make EVE more realistic" thread containing mostly "Don't break our EVE"-Posts on the pile. I neither expect nor want EVE to be a fully realistic spacecraft simulator. But I would prefer the look and feel of Newtonian Physics in EVE quite a lot. (Playing an other game is not an option.)

But I also try to consider the gameplay changes, that would be implied by a major change of the physics:


  1. No top speed, no limits?
  2. As the only top speed in the universe is the speed of light in vacuum, space ships at non-relativistic velocities (<30% Lightspeed) have no need to stop accelerating at max 5 km/s (~0.0017% Lightspeed) or lower. But what happens, if a player sets his vessel to max acceleration and goes afk for a couple of hours?

    To answer this question, we have to define that max acceleration first. Let's assume a really fast frigate with just one capsuleer. He may endure forces, a normal human wouldn't. So let's assume a constant acceleration of 50 g (about the highest acceleration a human has withstood click). This means 500 m/s² -> 30 km/s after a minute, 1800 km/s after an hour and so on. It would take over 6 hours to cover a distance of 1 AU and 1 day to reach 13 AU, flying at 14.7% lightspeed at that point. At this point the downtime would end the trip.

  3. Fights at high velocities
  4. Let's assume, you're sitting in an Interceptor, as an enemy fleet drops out of warp at about 100 km from your position. Your FC orders you to burn to them. Let's say you get as fast as 5 km/s. So you would need about 20 seconds to cover the distance.(Correct me, if I'm wrong. Never flown a fleet interceptor.) What would happen, if you are not limited to 5 km/s but to about 50 g? You would also cover the distance in 20 seconds, but would reach the fleet with a velocity of 10 m/s.

  5. Orbiting
  6. An other issue is orbiting. As there is no max velocity, one can always reach the ideal velocity for the radius, given by
    v=sqrt(a*R) v=>velocity, a=>acceleration, R=>orbital radius
    assuming, that the centrifugal force, necessary to maintain the orbit, comes from the thrusters of the orbiting ship.

    Let's say, our 50 g-Ship would like to orbit an other ship at 40 km. Then it would need to reach a orbital velocity of 1414 m/s (angular velocity 0.03 rad/s). That would be reached in less than 3 seconds from 0 velocity. But if the ship approaches with 10 km/s, it would have to decelerate, what would take about 17 seconds.


Hard to control
Most people are concerned about controlling spacecrafts will become a lot harder in this scenario. We are used to the behaviour of cars or planes. So the behaviour of spaceships is hard to get used to. But what would really change? The most maneuvers are performed by pressing one button. What's speaking against keeping it that way. If you order the ship, to orbit at x km, you press the button, and the computer calculates the necessary maneuvers.

What do you think? Are these major impacts on gameplay, or are they rather specific? Have I forgotten something?

And again: This thread isn't about turning EVE into a spacecraft simulator. It is about the impacts, newtonian physics would have onto gameplay. I'm not insisting, that CCP has to change the game.



Well the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, the fastest observable speed with the human eye is probably light. But things move much faster. I personally think that whatever the universe is expanding into, is accelerating the matter which is being created. So if our universe is expanding into a multiverse the matter surrounding our universe is being pulled by the gravity of an expanding multiverse.

So our multiverse is also expanding, and this causes it to pull on our universe.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#17 - 2013-11-10 23:35:29 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
The problem with real physics is that they are terrible from a gameplay perspective.

- No top speed means that the only limiting factor on ships is mass/inertia... which makes maneuvering a VERY tedious and boring affair for large ships in addition to chaotic and frustrating for smaller ships (I can definitely see overshooting or flying right past the target being a problem).

- Stasis Webifiers would be useless (as they reduce max speeds) unless they are based on some other principle. Making them affect mass might do the trick... but that would make them terrible against smaller ships (which have low mass) while crippling larger ones (which have very high mass) unless the large ships can gain enough speed (in which case nothing will be able to stop large ships from webbing each other and just cruise along at ridiculous speeds laughing).

- Afterburners, Microwarpdrives, and any other speed enhancement mod would have to be re-thought. They all add a certain percentage to the top velocity of a ship (and then some)... but what will they do now? Adding acceleration could be something... but it would only further complicate the problems inherent with flying in frictionless environment... which is un-intuitive to those who have not skated on ice before.

- close range battles will become a thing of the past (maneuvering will be tedious remember?). The only reliable way to damage someone will be with missiles, maybe drones, or shooting guns from extreme range.
Good Apollo BS4
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2013-11-10 23:54:08 UTC
Love the topic!!

Would add "stuff" about gravity's influence on the warp drive, if we are stipulating that there is such a thing as a warp drive...

Lagrange Points would be important too, and ships would need to rotate to decelerate or have some form of forward facing thing to slow the ship...

Also, the asteroid belt locations would make no sense and the stars in system would need some sort of Doppler Effect as you warp around in system...
Eurydia Vespasian
Storm Hunters
#19 - 2013-11-11 00:52:25 UTC
all this nerd talk.

for my part, I am able to suspend disbelief and assume that this game is set millennia in the future and that perhaps we in the present don't have all the answers about things we'd like to think we do.

I don't know about you guys but taking like 9 hours to warp to the gas giant near the end of the WH system I live in to gather my robotics I had building and then warp 9 hours back to my POS would just totally make my day.

all of it.

literally.
Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#20 - 2013-11-11 01:01:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Johan Civire
The answer :

1 - Space is vacum so no rockets can be fire off. The need to have a gravity pull to do it.

2 - Space is black no licht. licht need to get a object before you can see licht.

3 - There is NO sound in space because there is no air to travel in.

4 - We dont know how real traveling works we have no technologie for it.

5 - We using the pull technologie thats using gravity as traveling. We use rockets to get off this planet and then the gravity do the rest. We dont know how deep space traveling works. Yet.

6 - Same way how catapult works thats is how we are "traveling" in space.

7 - If you travel that fast like in eve online the time contineu change so you stay younger and the others are that are not traveling are getting older then you. So time is against you because for your traveling the time is going faster then there timer.

If we going to use this in eve, well then eve is back like 2002 beta.

AND "As a physicist" You already know this,,, so why this nonsense post?
123Next pageLast page